Re: update If anyone's wondering, i didnt call. It was hard not to, I mean, c'mon...it was the office of the president for goodness sakes, lol. anyhow, what should I do now? wait a few days and see if i get anything in the mail from them? I'm sure they'll send me something along the lines of "We're ever so sorry for inconveniencing you for these past few months, please forgive us, as we are deleting the erroneous TL and giving you the privelege of writing checks again...JUST IN TIME FOR X-MAS!!!" HAPPY HOLIDAYS!!" but if they don't happen to do that, how long should I wait to write another letter demanding they delete? Should I apply the same rules as for TransExEQ?
Re: update update: I called today just to ask if this TL is still on my report. I was sickeningly nice. <gag> I was put on hold twice for about 3 minutes each time. The woman could not find my file. Finally, she came back and told me she had my original dispute in front of her. She wanted to know what I wanted. I told her it was all in the letters, but that I basically wanted to know if the bank entry (i never said 'tradeline') was still on my report. She wouldnt answer me with a definite 'yes' or 'no'. instead she kept telling me I didnt give them enough identifying information. I told her I believed I gave them more than enough info, and that they didnt need this information from me when they listed it on my report in September. she suddenly wouldnt let me get a word in edgewise, telling me that by law they have to have enough identifying info, or they cant submit a dispute. (huh?) I told her my dispute was submitted on the day they received it. I asked her if this meant that she was unable to verify the entry. She said "of course, i just told you I dont have enough info" so I asked her point blank... "does this mean the entry is still, as of today, on my report with telecheck?" she said, 'well, it will be, uh, until, uh....' I took her stammering as an opportunity to say "thank you so much, have a wonderful day." <click> she was still stammering away as i hung up, lmao... I really wish I'd have gotten all that on tape dammit. I'm an idiot. I totally forgot. ok, so what does this mean? should i go try to write a check somewhere and then send an ITS? ETA: i waited until today, because i thought i might get something in the mail telling me whether it was verified, frivolous, or deleted. its been more than the lawful 5 days (mailing time) for them to do so, and i never got a thing.
Re: update Thats what I would do, you allowed them more than enough time to process the dispute. They're in violation. After you get turned down for writing a check, then I would send the next dispute to the personal name of the person in the 'office of the president' and tell her that since this erroneous tradeline was not deleted as of the December 9th, 2003 deadline imposed under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, if it is not deleted immediately, they will need to appear in court to explain why. And since they didn't need your information to place the erroneous tradeline on your report in the first place, and they didn't need your information to SEND YOU YOUR REPORT IN SEPTEMBER, they didn't need additional information to allow you to protect your rights as a consumer under the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Remember, they're supposed to restrict access to your credit file to the same high standards as ensuring that it is you who is doing the disputing, yet they'll let you touch-tone your name, social security number, and address into the telephone to obtain your report. If its good enough to obtain the report, its more than good enough to process the dispute.
Re: update ha! thats pretty much what I have in my letter... "You did not need to call me and get my personal information before you listed it on my file with Telecheck in September. My name, address, last 4 digits of my social security number, and a copy of the file you were somehow able to track down and send to me, are all you need to locate my file and process my dispute."
Re: Re: telecheck BS There is no law stating that consumers are required to give a CRA anything when disputing other than the words "I dispute...." And Telecheck is NOT a CRA, it is a CA, so treat them like a CA.
Re: Re: telecheck BS If Telecheck attempts to collect debts it is a CA, if it accepts and provides information on consumers to others it is a CRA. It can be both, and bound by laws applicable to both.
Re: Re: telecheck BS all the numbers at the bottom of your check." crowmom ============= They already have this - it's on the check they have that bounced. What enieacks! >------------>> LB59
Re: Re: Re: telecheck BS I understand why you say they're a CA. However, they arent the ones collecting on this. (No one is actually.) They're only listing it, making it impossible for me to write checks. Moreover, I'm confused as to why you don't think they're a CRA. I value your opinion, so when you say something I pay attention. Everything I've read says they ARE a CRA, and I was going to use the FCRA laws against them. I have a letter ready to go today, but I'll change it if i'm about to make a fool of myself.
Re: Re: Re: Re: telecheck BS *FACTA ALERT* Telecheck is no longer a CRA, they are a NSCRA... "Nationwide Specialty Consumer Reporting Agency" 603 (w) The term "nationwide specialty consumer reporting agency" means a consumer reporting agency which compiles and maintains files on consumers on a nationwide basis relating to - (1) medical records or payments (2) residential or tenent history (3) check writing history (4) employment history (5) insurance claims" Yes, yet another new term for Alphabet Soup... But now there is no way for any company like Telecheck to claim that they are not covered under the FCRA, they now have their own SPECIALTY definition.
Re: Re: Re: Re: telecheck BS Oh, I just saw the only difference that I could find with them being considered an NSCRA... Instead of *30* days to complete the investigation; when this part of the FCRA goes into effect, they will now have *45* days to complete the investigation. Why NSCRA's deserve the 15 day extension, is anyone elses gues...
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: telecheck BS Now thats some really good information. I was about to ask where in the heck you got that info, but I remembered the 'new FCRA' thread. I just went back and read it. DUH, why didnt I think of that before? Thanks. In my case, 45 days was Dec. 9th, and the only reason I gave them that long was because I sent them extra information. Thanks so much for clearing this up. My letter goes out tomorrow.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: telecheck BS Well, I didnt send the letter yet because I forgot about everything credit-related this past week. (the holidays, relatives, food, alcohol, etc. lol) anyway, in the middle of all the hubbub around here, (on the 26th) the lady from the 'office of the president' at telecheck called me and told me they had done some research. I really didn't want to talk to her with my relatives standing right there, so i blew her off and told her i'd call her back. should i go ahead and send my letter or call first? I'm very curious as to what their 'research' turned up. my letter has a 'you didn't verify, remove this or else' tone. what do you think?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: telecheck BS I would say to call, since they may have finally decided to investigate... You don't want to respond to a phone call that said we researched and... with a letter that says you didn't investigate... If the results aren't satisfactory, THEN you can send the letter... along with a procedural request...
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: telecheck BS Kids are back in school, so I'm finally able to get back to my credit, etc. I called the lady at Telecheck twice, and got her voicemail both times. She finally called me back today (while i was on the phone with CBE collection agency, lol) and said she was trying to get this 'situation' resolved. I remembered to record the call. (they're in TX.) I really thought that she was going to say they couldnt verify, and they'd deleted it. No such luck. anyway she basically said that this had not been verified yet because she found out that the bank had been bought by another bank a few years ago. point is, it wasnt verified, its still on my reports after almost 90 days, and get this...she was stupid enough to tell me it wasn't even listed as 'in dispute' this whole time!! hmmm....*sniff* ...I smell....*sniff* ....hmm....is that dough?? lol anyway, I'm ready to send a letter tomorrow. I've messed around with this long enough. Will update as soon as i hear something.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: telecheck BS oh i forgot the best part.... she admitted that this TL wasnt even supposed to be on my report at all....EVER...it was supposed to be on my husbands. after she finally got ahold of someone at this new bank, they somehow matched his SS# with what they had on file. they never even had mine at all. I have all this on tape. and i think i can use it in court if i have to because they're in TX, and i even got her on tape saying she was in TX. (i'm in MO---these are both 1-party states) I have the following violations so far (in VERY basic english)...if anyone sees anymore, please let me know: 1. inaccurate reporting 2. not listing as in dispute 3. not removing the TL after not being able to verify in 45 days 4. knowingly listing inaccurate information 5. not writing to me to let me know what their 'investigation' uncovered. question: now that i know this new bank has hubby's info, I realize this means they may try to collect. should i send a dispute directly to the bank? i don't think i can ask them to validate since they're the OC, right? what can i do to head them off? anything?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: telecheck BS Well, I took the weekend to painstakingly compose my letter to telecheck, and guess what... I checked my mailbox before I went to the post office, and there was a letter from telecheck that said: "Thank you for your inquiry. Your file has been cleared of all derogatory information and currently reflects a positive status. Based on the information you have provided, we find no indication that TeleCheck would decline to approve your checks or new account applications." although this was my initial goal, I still feel like I am owed something for all the crap I had to go thru to get this removed. I mean, they have like 5 violations! And it was NEVER supposed to be there in the first place! I'm happy that its been removed, but this is almost anti-climactic, lol. Am I being a whiner?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: tel Still send the ITS. Include in it (if you don't have this already) that you've suffered real damages of not being able to pay with check over the Christmas holiday season, being required to charge some of your purchases to high interest credit cards, and being hit with fees from your bank for excessive cash withdrawls. It looks like you may have a cause for up to $5,000 so I'd send an offer to settle for $500 and give them 15 days to respond. Send it to the president. Make sure to not include anything in there about your taping of the phone call, just in case. Don't want to tip your hand. If you do bring this to court, have a complete transcript in "You Said She Said" format (I took shorthand / notes of the entire telephone conversation as it was happening) to submit with your complaint showing they admitted that it was probably an issue.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: telecheck BS I would sue them just to stay in practice. Aplogizing to the cop who's about to give you a ticket will seldom get you out of the ticket. They put you through hell and violated your FCRA rights in the process. Make 'em pay for the privilege.
