This is false and misleading, and frightens me that you work for a consumer reporting agency: Since you seem to have enough time on your hands, I suggest you go read a copy of the FCRA, which your company is bound by law to follow. For your reference, it can be found here: http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fcra.htm If you have any questions regarding this document, feel free to post them here and we will direct you to either caselaw or FTC opinions, whichever may be appropriate. If you decide not to do that, please feel free to actually work for your paycheck and go investigate some disputes and/or answer questions from consumers -- but please do not continue to give out false, misleading information. Again, if you're answering questions from consumers, read the FCRA and give them the correct answers to their questions.
Why wouldn't you admit you work for TU? Its OK. Everybody here knows if you are a CSR, you have been trained with bad information! I for one hope you stay and enlighten us on their inner workings, as well as listen to our arguments about what we see REALLY happening at TU as consumers, and you will listen with an open mind. "This is what I have been trained to do blah blah", goes alot further then "This is the way it is and we are right because we are TU". Welcome.
"Exactly what information do you feel I mislead others about? " PLease refer to your first post. The question was "I requested "how" they verified these accounts and who was contacted. I was told one account verified by phone and two accounts were verified electronically. Is this really sufficient as far as my procedural request goes?" your reply was " Yes actually it is sufficent" The FCRA says "a description of the procedure used to determine the accuracy and completeness of the information shall be provided to the consumer by the agency, including the business name and address of any furnisher of information contacted in connection with such information and the telephone number of such furnisher, if reasonably available..." Where is the description of proceedure? "is it his?" "yes it is" ...is NOT sufficient. How does this satisfy the requirement for " accuracy and completeness? Also, responding to a proceedural request with a "frivolous dispute" reply is not proper or legal. Nowhere is there provision to label a proceedural request friviolous. Only a DISPUTE can be so. Where do YOU get your information? Radi8
The date listed on each account is the last time TU received an update from the company, whether its from a monthly update or an investigation. If NO information is changed, the date DOES NOT change. If you dispute an account as not mine and the date was 12-2002 and the company responded in 1-2003 with no changes, the report will still reflect a date of 12-2002 b/c thats the last time the company updated info on the account.
This is useful information. Now at least we know where TU gets that date from. It's actually a "last reported" date. Radi8
Then how does that explain how 1 account was updated with a new date and the other 2 were not. If what you state is correct then all 3 would show the old dates since no info was changed.
I got one of these letters after an item was verified. This letter prob wasn't in response to your response. It is just form letter. Also, I called them shortly after I received the "frivolous" letter and they willingly agreed to reinvestigate it. Of course, when I got my results back, they said it was previously verified. BUT I called again and actually got someone very nice to help. She re-submitted my dispute and re-worded it as to get some attention. Fingers crossed. I'm sure you will hear something from them. I know it is a no-no to call, but I seem to have the best luck with it. Nikki EQ 573 05/02; 661 12/02 TU 549 05/02; 561 01/03 EX 000 05/02; 633 01/03
Out of all 3 of the CRA's I really would rather deal with TU. They are (for the most part) friendly and most do try to help. I also think it's a mistake to label someone a troll just because of their IP Address. Don't worry, if he is he'll reveal himself in short order. Let's give him a chance.
I must admit, as far as friendly goes, TU beats EQ and Exp. The Mgr. I spoke with was polite and helpful, but unfortunately, wrong. People at Exp are all switching to decaf, or recent ex-smokers or something. Crabby. I haven't seen anybody call the tu person a "troll" yet. Just leery. So, welcome, TU person, hope you enjoy your stay with us. Have any credit issues YOU need help with? Radi8
Me, too. They have updated and/or deleted everything I've asked them to Except that positive FMC tradeline they deleted instead of updating. But I'll forgive them that, because it was due to fall off next month anyway, and I have several other positive auto tradelines. TU was very very very good to DH and I over the holidays
I have had opposite experience with TU, I was hung up on by a supervisor. Though there has been a couple of people that have gone out of their way to help me, but the sup hanging up on me takes the cake, Exp I have never had any problems with, Efx of course they don't always say what I want them to (LOL!) but they have never been so rude to me.
I am glad to see a TU person here on the boards. I hope that you will be mindfull of why WE are here and will not try to change us. If you are here to learn that's wonderful, it's a great place for it. If you are here to help that's great, every little bit counts. If you are here to disparage that's not so good, get lost. I am wondering though, if you are here in your official capacity as an employee of TU or if you are here out of curiosity, or what... would you care to elaborate on that? --- Glad you could join us for a while, but you'd better believe that you can't trip us up...
Not sure yet if a troll or not, but he/she was on the feedback forum questioning why we have the ability to check out IP addresses.
I would think a troll would be smart enough to mask thier IP address using some public proxy like anonymizer or any of the free ones out there. Any dialup connection would do this as well.
christi, i am having the same problem with mine. they verified each and every dispute and this was my first one!!!!!! i am thinking of finding out exactly how many violations they have racked up. i can think of two now: failure to maintain accurate records and refusal to investigate claims. i also have one which shows a verified date of 1/03 when tu says that the dispute ended on 12/27. i called to see what they would say and they say that the dates show verified on various dates in december and i was like well if that is the case then why is it only showing that two accounts are verified in december and the other on other dates. i actually posted this before i read your dilemma. let me know what you are going to do and maybe we can put our brains together or get someone from tu to explain exactly how they verified dates within a 30 day time period ending 12/02, but i have dates as far back as 7/00. that is ridiculous
I saw that too yesterday. It's also funny the person from TU only responded to my post even though there are several other TU posts on this board.
I think they are full of it. 2 of the accounts that were verified still show an old date. Also, If the accounts are verified electronically without human involvement, how can they truly verify these accounts as mine?? This is how they ensure all accounts are accurate?
1* you must think that I work for TU because my answer was reasonable and made complete sense. 2*I know that to get the correct information, you must go to the source and listen to what they are telling you. 3*They are very nice, considerate people who are willing to help people if they would only listen. truthunltd ================ 1* No: It's because, Your comments are ignorant and dumb just like theirs. We don't need the same deceptive comments from you. 2*They are not the source of the facts. 3*Yeah: nice like being gored by a bull. LB 59
