The final week

Re: Truth, reality

I hit a nerve, apparently.

I'll presume question marks signal that you are asking for my opinion. How do I like that? Just fine. Was it not what I was hoping for? Yes, it was not. I was hoping for information about your entire credit history (since that is what the thread is about), not just a comment on that account.

What about the rest of your file?

 

Congrats LKH!

I'm also about to close on my re-fi. Current rates are 9.5% for the first mortgage, and 14.5% for 2nd mortgage. I'm about to close on my refi with 5.0% first mortgage, and a 4.5% HELOC.

When I got the initial mortgage, my FICO was just around 601-605, now my middle score is 703 with my EFX FICO at 721. So I thank God and for letting me discover all the information on this site (I started the whole credit cleanup with a 567 EFX FICO back in may 2001).

Thanks folks!

 

Re: Truth, reality

It's nice to be remembered. ;o) Way better than being dismembered...

Congrats on the house, BTW!!! Good Luck with TU.

 

Re: Truth, reality

To the membership, at-large: (read the entire affair if you're going to comment) By "the nonsense" I "pulled," LKH is referring to my desire to see a fair fight, to invite another to the forum, and to give someone-- whose name, address, telephone number and email address were displayed by an anonymous Internet poster (so careless that they didn't even know they did it) on a message board accessible by the entire free world-- a chance to respond to the anonymous Internet poster's comments about them.

http://consumers.creditnet.com/stra...?postid=245971&highlight=Federated#post245971

And, as it turned out, my prediction about the outcome of the trial was fairly accurate, a fact conveniently ignored by the participants of the discussion. That is amusing.

You may have questions about my motives all you wish, but the basis of my motivation doesn't change the truth. What are the questions?

Exactly, what I want to know is exactly what I asked: Does your credit file reflect your true credit history? Your hesitation speaks volumes.

 

Re: Truth, reality

Edit: []

 

Re: Truth, reality

LOL

Smoochies, Quixote, WAVING!!!!!!!

Sassy

 

Re: Truth, reality

... as well as a chance to inform the opposing counsel only days before the hearing, and tell them all about the consumer's expected arguments and tactic in court. No degree of eloquency you may possess can change that. The only answer you were capable of producing with respect to others' accusations, was "you don't make any sense". IMHO, they've all made perfect sense. This being an open forum does not make it probable for the opposing counsel to browse here 2 days prior to trial and know everything about the other party, first hand, thanks to you.

There is nothing wrong with making the wrong decision. The only problem lies in your repeated failures to recognize that error.



Saar

 

Re: Truth, reality

Hahahaha!! I decided to take Greg off ignore to see the rest of his comments (I can only see what y'all quote). As usual, my decision to ignore him was right, and back he goes. He has joined the ranks of those who believe that everyone is guilty until proven innocent, I guess.

 

Re: Truth, reality

Whoop-de-do. You see that I'm still standing, right?

When I asked, "To whom do I owe any explanation?" you replied "To pbm, and hopefully he'll be asking for one soon."

He didn't ask. Are you getting that?

I swear; you can't even walk around and say what's on your mind any more. Do you want an open forum, or not?

Indeed, he plaintiff said that my actions were a non-issue in the trial. Do you, in your ivory tower, dispute that? If he didn't want his case made public, he shouldn't have (duh), made it public. How do you know others didn't contact the lawyer-- without disclosing it? So, are you just whining for the sake of whining? Are you saying that the plaintiff's case was so poor that a mere Internet message board could change the outcome materially?

I'm flattered, but give me a break.

Do any lawyers try to create a sense of frustration among the members of the public so that they feel helpless in the legal system-- and run to pay a lawyer?

You're a lawyer. Did I break a law?

Save the goody two-shoes act. I don't see you lambasting those trashing-talking the defendant; I don't see you scolding the plaintiff for (anonymously) giving out the oppositions name, address, telephone number and email address. What's up with that? If you want to make this some kind of pseudo-moral thing, I'm your man-- and you're way off in your premise. You don't make any sense.

If you don't want a public discussion about your credit report, then don't discuss it in public.

 

Re: Truth, reality

Oh my, (bowing and scraping) the great and mighty Greg Fisher has stepped out of his ivory tower to address all of us, the uninformed, lowly peons that we are. Oh high and mighty gracious one, you even used the word "duh" so that we would better be able to communicate with you in our native language.

And to think, my oh my, that you of the supreme moral counsel would deign to concern yourself with our credit scores.

Greg, you'd better start now, it's a very long climb back up that staircase to the top of the tower that you and you alone have set yourself upon. And I sincerely hope that you have a good proctologist, that spike at the top is tricky to remove.

Mouthyma

 

Re: Truth, reality

saar, I did not know you were a lawyer. Is that true?

 

Re: Truth, reality

So, you're not one who tries to remove accurate negative credit information from your file?

Do you advocate it?

 

Re: Truth, reality

[]


Saar

 

LKH,

Congrats on the new home!!! You are one of the most positive individual here on CN, and your success and hard work is inspiration for me. Keep up the good work and don't worry about negative comments from the "wanna be trolls" here on CN.

 

Re: Truth, reality

LKH!!!!

Sorry for the delay --- HUGE CONGRATS on your new home!!!!
When you feel up to it - we'll get together in Vegas and that lobster dinner will be on me (unless of course you're comped

 

Re: Shocking, scary questions

It was only a simple, yes-or-no question.

The difference it makes varies among those interested because it will have different manifestations in them. And, it would, of course, depend on what you advocate.

But, that's not the question. To be, or not to be: That is the question.

If your point is that you don't have influence, then this thread is worthless.

Of course, that's not the case.

On one hand, if you advocate it, you could influence someone else to try it, they may succeed, and it will affect my score, unfairly, and, all things being equal, if a lender-- who only has one more loan to give-- has to choose between them and me for the loan, and the other person gets it because of deceit, I will be unfairly affected-- that is, unless you believe that since they have the same opportunity to act with deceit, fairness exists.

On the other hand, if you don't advocate it, then I have a fighting chance.

Continue? At the risk inciting your ire by asking another question, I'll ask it (because I don't know of any other device to use to request information): Have we discussed this before?

I don't need to know anything, so the basis of your question is off.

But, this is an open forum of ideas. The removal of accurate negative information seems to be a central theme of this group and I want to confirm it, here (lest I be presumptuous about your character). That's partly for me (for the basis of future questions) and partly for the uninitiated (so they don't get the wrong idea about what we're talking).

I'm not here for cheerleading; I'm here to get information I don't already have. Some of that information is in regard to human nature. In this case: The length to which one will go to obtain possessions and services though manipulation of credit data and constructing a history of payment that never was, and how a consumer actually feels about what they did.

I know all the dirty tricks already, and they bore me. For instance, systematically, TransUnion doesn't give the consumer all the information in the consumer's file. In turn, in angst because of that, the consumer may feel that he is justifed in juicing-up his report, and does so.

You don't have to answer. Would you rather I just lob you softballs right over the plate?