I was made aware way back in the deposition/discovery stage of my suit that all three bureaus as well as the creditors not only are aware of these types of consumer boards but also monitor on a regular basis. As long as what you say is true, they can't sue, there is no libel. But isn't it a twist of fate... each time they release a credit report or a creditor reports inaccurate informaiton about us..., that is TRUE LIBEL. They don't like us discussing the truth but it's ok for them to release inaccurate information over and over again about us. Ironic isn't it. http://www.bankrate.com/brm/news/cc/20010906a.asp?prodtype=cc
TU hoping we'll shut up??? Hey... this is really a compliment! The CRAs are getting sued more now. This board promotes knowing your rights, fighting, and suing when you have appropriate grounds. Think of the lawsuits that are running now just from members on this board... we encourage each other, share information, and in general, act intelligently. we stopped being intimidated... being fooled... being stupid. If even 1% of the US Population sued the CRAs and got only 1 FCRA violation won... that's 1,000 a hit times a huge number of individuals. And you don't have to sue. Most states have an agency (in Georgia it's the Office of Consumer Affairs) that will take the matter in their hands... and have the full civil and criminal authority to not only look at your case but also access damages and get them awarded to you! Yes, you don't have to sue to get paid for FCRA violations. Your state can help you... free of charge! And here We are encouraging a revolution of thought... we encourage taking action... We are taking advantage of our LEGAL RIGHTS given to us by the law, both common and statutory. We read cases and we file lawsuits when necessary... The CRAs should see intelligent consumers as a method of correcting and updating their systems for MAXIMUM ACCURACY!!! If only accuracy were really the goal. We should be allowed to have the best credit files possible when we've worked so hard to EARN it. Yes, earn it. and yet, instead, our members get pathetic letters like the one described in this post. Now, think about the real intent of that letter. It was to intimidate the individual who received it... yes. But it's real purpose was this very post. The TU employee knew (or guessed) that the letter would be posted... and why? to tell us that LITTLE BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU. WE KNOW WHO YOU ARE AND WE WILL HURT YOU IF YOU POST THE TRUTH... So then we can, I guess... get scared and stop posting??? Free speech stops... intimidation reigns and wins??? Lions and tigers and bears... oh my. I am always going to remember that clearly, TU and others read here. I am encouraged that there is a way we can communicate with them... Yes, encouraged because I hope someday our suggestions may truly be taken to heart and improvements might really occur in the system. I guess the CRAs still haven't figured out that maximum file accuracy means minimum contact with us! Means you have less to deal with your data.. and more time to sell your product!!! now if the CRAs would only they'd listen to this board and improve their ways...
You know, even if TU had been good to me, and they have not, I can't imagine being anything but totally furious at this attempt to silence us..where do they get off doing this? Whether it is initials or whatever is irrelevant...this is totally outrageous and I see it as no laughing matter. Ok, it totally pisses me off. What's next? They gonna tell us who we can associate with to maintain our credit? Oooooh, I'd be getting everyone on this...everyone.....Talk about Big Brother.... I'd be calling every representative, senator, etc. I could muster and in a lawyers office ASAP.
Yes I agree with you Marie... I have a legit case against ALL the 3 CRA's... I have inaccurate and items that do NOT belong to me!!! Now I have a HUGE paper trail to back everything up and if they don't settle to my DEMANDS, then damn right I will be suing and going as far as I am able too! TU, you guys hear that??
How pathetic has it gotten for them to go that far? Good lord.....TU should get off the internet gestapo and pay for some basic education/training for their employees...then that way they won't have to cry like a bunch of babies about posts that are totally TRUE concerning their knowledge of the rights of the people....ooh! uh oh, now I'm next
But (as GEORGE pointed out at one point) it COSTS YOU MONEY to use cash????? Right????? (ATM fees, loosing interest on the money in your bank, etc.)
Well.. I won't withdraw completely You are right... you can USE the system to your advantage as we all do Besides, I just today got all 3 of my Cap1 cards down to 9.9 fixed so I'm keeping them... I'm just not going to apply a lot... because that generates CRA revenue.
And everyone thought i was crazy when I said that we ALL should watch out with all the validation stuff etc. This isnt that farfetched to me. These people are crooks. Yall probably stilll think I am crazy but maybe not as much. LKH, Denise Richardson mentioned that she couldnt post in reference to her Fleet bank lawsuit online so be very careful. This is a lawsuit now so that changes things.
Dear Members, No, we have not received any court papers. In fact, to my knowledge we have never even communicated with the CRAs. And we certainly have never shared member information with a third-party, nor do we have any intention of doing so without consulting you first. Rest assured there is no leak on our end. With respect to restricting chatroom access, currently only registered members can participate in chat. Unlike the board, non-members are not able to lurk in chat since they will be unable to log on in the first place. I am not sure how we can further restrict that access. Perhaps you have some ideas? In response to Saar's specific concern that the true names & addresses are readily accessible to anyone, this is not so. For one, we require only one valid piece of information for registration: a working email address. We recognized the importance of preserving anonymity on this board early on. To discourage visitors from revealing their true identity, for example, we removed all fields from the default registration form that could possibly be linked to their identity. Of course, if a member chooses to share information on this board there is little we can do to prevent that, other than to discourage users from doing so. In closing I would like to reiterate that your true identity is not known to us. Thus, even if subpoenad there would be very little personal information to turn over. In this manner your anonymity really works to protect both parties. Efforts to inhibit you from freely expressing yourself on this board could constitute a violation of your constitutional right to freedom of speech, and should be dealt with accordingly. If you have any further questions or concerns please let me know. Sincerely, pbm
Did not mean to imply that I know it was done through this board. Thanks for the update, we'll have to keep looking for the "source". Saar
As far as CRA employees registering - they have credit problems too, LOL. They don't pay them much, you know. And they have first amendment rights too, on public boards like this. I think this idiot is just that - an idiot. One individual who overstepped the bounds of his postition, and is probably now having to do his laundry (snicker). He could never get a court order for that type of thing. It isn't a crime in this country to speak your mind. He's more likely to get a pink slip. My suggestion, a password protected section of the board for more confidential postings like loophole info, letters, etc. - where we would not want spies to have access.
I think this site should post the top number of domains that visit. I am positive this information is kept track of for ad revenue, etc. Speaking of Trans Union, I called them today because I received a report that had several disputes, all returned with results (ha!) "New information below." Well, I called and asked the person several times why it says "new information below" and there is no new information? She said, it really doesn't mean that there is new information, just that it was verified. Huh? Then change the statement. In addition, I questioned why none of the dates had changed if something was "verified" - she said that it is the creditor's choice to update the verification date. I think that sounds like total BS, because there again, you have inaccurate information, not recording dates and claiming to have "new information below." I could go on and on and on and on. My score did go up to 650 though, why, I don't know as nothing changed. blah! LKH, I would CALL TransUnion and DEMAND to know who wrote you the letter! Hello, you are fired.
You know, LKH has a very good case against TU. I can't wait to see how much $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ he is awarded in court.
Now I'm sure there are people that cruise these boards to see what's new. And I'm sure they take some of the gathered information to implement new rules to make things more difficult for the consumer. But they still have to abide by the laws and if they don't then we have the right to take action in court. However, I don't believe for a second that this happened. I am a member to several other boards, although this is the only credit related one, and I have seen many fictitious post written by authors to try and get a rise out of the group. 9 out of 10 times it works. I love to buy things but I'm not buying this...... Just my opinion on the matter. -Om
