WARNING.......Privacy Guard

Sucker · May 6, 2003

Thanks again, Doc! Much appreciated

Pretty sure I'll win! I have a friend that's an attorney for the state. He'll help me out

lbrown59 · May 6, 2003

The really sad part about this whole thing is that we pay for membership to services like PG so they can HELP protect us against these problems.

taylortd
==================
Maybe that's the problem: Someone doesn't want us protected.

The END** *** **LB 59

lbrown59 · May 6, 2003

The really sad part about this whole thing is that we pay for membership to services like PG so they can HELP protect us against these problems.

taylortd
==================
Maybe that's the problem: Someone doesn't want us protected.

The END** *** **LB 59

lbrown59 · May 7, 2003

Re: Re: WARNING.......Privacy Guard

Then they freak out and quickly remove the hard inquiries from your reports. That's ok. You've got the proof that they broke the law already.
They call you on the phone and tell you that all's well because they removed the hard inquiries.

PsychDoc

====================

Doesn't matter if they do. They still did the crime and you should sue them anyway and make them do the time.
They don't let us off the hook just because we paid them, so why should we let them off the hook just because they removed something off our reports or ceased collection action, etc.?
The END** *** **LB 59

Originally posted by PsychDoc
Most class action lawsuits take many years to work through -- so that the lawyers can spend a lot of time amassing "necessary" research -- i.e., thousands of billable hours, which leaves the actual wronged party (the "class") with about four dollars and twenty-seven cents each after the costs of advertising new recruits for the class in mainstream periodicals are deducted.

Far more fun would be to collect $1000 per hard inquiry -- the statutory damages specified by the FCRA when there is no "permissable purpose." Even better, you'll probably collect your money within weeks, not years.

Here's what will happen. (CAVEAT: I'm not telling anyone to do this. I'm no lawyer. What I'm doing is giving my guess as to what will happen if you choose to pursue the small claims option.)

1) You go down to the courthouse and ask to speak to the small claims court clerk. You ask for the form you need to fill out. You write the name of the company for "defendant," and you write $1000 multiplied by the number of hard inquiries (or the maximum allowable damage claim allowed in small claims in your county) for the "damages." You write "Impermissable credit inquiries" in the place where it wants you to write out your reasons for bringing the lawsuit (and nothing more).

2) You arrange for "SERVICE" (i.e., delivery of the lawsuit) to the corporate headquarters of the defendant. No, you are not required to serve their local agent if they have one, although that's an option -- it's up to you. When I sued the three CRAs, I didn't serve the local agents in my state; rather, I had the CRAs served at their headquarters buildings in Atlanta, Chicago, and Orange, CA.

3) You then call them on the phone and let them know you've filed the lawsuit, that they'll receive service shortly, and that once that happens, you'll be willing to speak to their general counsel about it, not before.

4) Then they freak out and quickly remove the hard inquiries from your reports. That's ok. You've got the proof that they broke the law already -- the printouts from the net, the hard copy from Trans Union that you ordered the day before you filed suit, whatever. Remember that a statutory damage doesn't require that you be DAMAGED in some other way -- rather, it's like a speed limit -- if you break the statute and are caught, there's a statutory penalty, period.

5) They call you on the phone and tell you that all's well because they removed the hard inquiries. You then say, "All's not well. I don't take it very lightly when my civil rights as outlined by the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act are violated. I take that very seriously, in fact. However I will withdraw the lawsuit in exchange for an x-thousand-dollars settlement (the amount you specified in your lawsuit -- not more). They then tell you that's outrageous, and you say, "Look I'm willing to negotiate the amount a bit, but it sounds like you're not interested in doing even that, so I'll see you in court and let the judge review your statutory damages. Enjoy [name of your town]."

6) They freak and make you an offer. You settle for between 40% and 70% of what you originally asked.

7) You then write about your wonderful learning experience on the board. Now wasn't that fun?

Doc
Click to expand...

picantel · May 7, 2003

Re: Re: WARNING.......Privacy Guard

because it all comes down to willful noncompliance or error. I do not believe a judge would rule in anyone's favor for a legitimate error they are taking steps to correct.

Log in / Register

Forums

WARNING.......Privacy Guard

Sucker Well-Known Member

lbrown59 Well-Known Member

lbrown59 Well-Known Member

lbrown59 Well-Known Member

picantel Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Log in / Register

Useful Searches

WARNING.......Privacy Guard

Sucker Well-Known Member

lbrown59 Well-Known Member

lbrown59 Well-Known Member

lbrown59 Well-Known Member

picantel Well-Known Member

Share This Page