I subpoena'd Trans Union for some information contained in my credit report that they refused to provide in hard copy form for me (I need for an upcoming lawsuit). Just got a letter from their legal counsel . . . ***** Addressed to me RE: Subpoena - my name I am in receipt of your subpoena you served, etc. . . . The only such records in the possession of Trans Union Corporation would be the credit report(s) of this/these individual(s), and I regret that due to the constraints of federal law, we are legally unable to provide the document(s) requested. Please be advised the the Federal Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. 1681, prohibits consumer reporting agencies, such as Trans Union, from issuing credit reports unless a permissible purpose, as set forth in Section 604 of that law, exists. While the FCRA allows us to issue a consumer report in response to a court order, the Federal Trade Commission, which is responsible for enforcing the FCRA, has ruled that a subpoena is not a court order and to produce a consumer credit report in response to a subpoena would be a violation of federal law. We would be able to provide you with the credit report(s) you have requested if you obtain a court order or the consent of the consumer(s) who is/are the subject(s) of the report(s), or if you can demonstrate another permissible purpose as set forth in the statute. Etc. *** Am I in the Twilight Zone? I requested information contained in my own credit report. They addressed the letter to me and referenced the subpoena in my name. They clearly understand that I am requesting my own credit info. Why do they have to be such jerks? Why not just comply with the subpoena? It wasn't a difficult request and it was very clearly laid out in the subpoena. There is no possible way that they could have misunderstood. Aargh!
What do you think the judge would think about it? "Your Honor, I tried to get MY OWN report, even had it subpoenaed, and TU said it was a violation of federal law. How can I present my case when I can't even see MY OWN report. And here is the letter to prove that this is what TU said" They should be squirming pretty good by the time you get finished speaking that!
Interestingly, I don't see that they cc:d the court on their letter. I'm curious as to their intent in terms of the subpoena -- as I understand it, they cannot just not answer it. And to repeat myself . . . I don't understand why they have to be such jerks! I also find it a bit humorous that they are quoting the FCRA, when the fact that they wouldn't give me the info in the first place violates 15 U.S.C. 1681g(a)(1). I am planning on sending back a letter explictly providing them permission to provide the info to the court (cc:ing the court, of course). If they continue to play games after that, I might consider suing them (although I must admit that considering suing one of the CRAs is daunting.)
Wioth a response like that I would seek to amend the complaint to add TU as a co-defendant for violation of FCRA in refusing to provide you with a copy of your own credit report. let's see them wiggle out of THAT one, especially since you have such a fine paper trail.
Do you think its would be better to include TU in the suit (I am suing a CA on 11 separate violations, of which TU is really only involved in this one) or would it be better to go after them separately? Or, just ignore their complete stupidity and just get my evidence from them?
You can't go after them separately. Their violation, if any, arises out of the instant case. Either ammend your complaint or file a motion to compel. .
I did not request my entire credit report. Rather my subpoena is for specific delinquency date which is not included in the credit report that is generated either by hard copy or online. But based upon the letter I received from TU, this is a very good point. In my reply to TU, I think I will address this. There is no reason for them to submit my entire credit report. Rather, a very simple letter saying "the original delinquency date reported to TU by XX is XX" would be sufficient.
Re: Re: Tu Subpoena Within 90 days of reporting a ding, a DF is required to furnish the date of delinquency preceding the neg action. Is THIS the date you subpoena'd? Now this is interesting. I've been contemplating this issue for a loooong time. .
Re: Re: Re: Tu Subpoena Butch - That is exactly the date that I've subpoena'd. Via telephone conversations TU has confirmed that the CA has not provided any date whatsoever, so my 7 years is re-calculated daily. They absolutely refuse, however, to send confirmation of this.
