There will always be an occassional problem with online services. So, because they have a problem that would cost you 3 days of a 365 day subscription, you think it is ok to just keep re-registering and getting it for free. Yes this person wonders why you don't pay for it. Since you decided to take a direct shot at me with that statement, here is my statement: reregistering over and over again to keep getting free service instead of paying for it is nothing more than stealing. You people doing that should feel pretty proud of yourselves.
I think they may have put a stop to it...I admit I did it the end of November, December, January and February. Tried to do it in March...wouldnt let me. I called and they said to fax my bank statement or a utility bill for verification. I did this, they responded via email and said I had already used the free service and would have to pay. Now I'm paid up until March 22, 2003. I also paid for Privista until March 6, 2003. The only one I keep getting for free is TU.
Actually your repeated shots at other people are what started this. It is really none of your business what other people choose to spend or not spend their money on. I don't happen to think it's worth the money and if they change it so I can't use it free anymore then I will just have to order my report and score a few times a year. It is not worth $80 to me. I don't mean to be rude but we don't need the creditexpert police. If you took the time to read through the posts you would see that creditexperts problems are numerous and far more then a few days a year. If you think it's worth it then good pay for it. Other people are entitled to make that decision for themselves.
It becomes my business when it is posted on a public message board. I did PAY for it. I don't believe that at post 2 times would constitute repeated shots at others. People that do things like this, in my opinion, have learned nothing and in a couple of years will end up in the same boat they were in. And, I would bet that most of the regulars would agree with me that it just isn't right to cheat a business by registering numerous times to get something for free.
You are entitled to your opinion. I'm just saying other people are entitled to their own. I don't really care who agrees with you, I'm not in a popularity contest. I don't base my decisions or form opinions on what other people think.
Yikes; that's a pretty loaded statement. I would venture to guess that anyone that spends endless months rebuilding their credit and restoring themselves to a decent credit standing would probably not go back out and ruin it again. Maybe it's my rosey tinted glasses, or just the optimistic side of me, but I wouldn't place that type of judgement on anyone on this board without knowing what their intentions really are. <?> I guess the only people on this board that have any credibility or good moral values are those with 2,000+ posts? Well, I see I have approximately 2,258 posts to go before my opinion means anything. That's encouraging.
When and where did I say you needed to have posted 2000 + times to be considered a regular? I thing that comment in whole on your part is out of line as you think mine was.
You're right; I'm sorry. It's my fault for thinking that was how somone would determine who is a 'regular' on this board. How do you determine who is 'regular' then if it's not by number of postings?
I think LKH is talking about people who have been posting on this board on and off for quite some time. People come and go on these boards on a daily basis, but the "regulars" always seem to come back to the board and help others even after they have accomplished their credit sucess. Some regulars don't post every day, evey week or every month for the matter, there all a types a regulars, the ones that post quite often and the ones that stop by every now and then and check in and offer their advice and help when they can. It really has nothing to do with the # of posts you have here. I have seen people post 1000+ and not one of them made a lick of sense LOL.
MY DEFINITION OF A "REGULAR" is anybody who is on here more than one day per week and does more than WHO KNOWS HOW MANY POSTS...maybe 20+ a week??? 5 posts per month can't be a so-called "REGULAR"..."INFREQUENT GUEST"
Back to the topic of the thread... CE has been down more than it has been up this weekend. What gives? This is reason enough not to pay their freaking $80.
I had hoped this was done with, but does the fact that it is down mean everyone is entitled to another 30 days free? I agree, there have been problems, and if people are upset about it, demand a refund. But, my stand on it remains the same. This is my last post on this subject. LOL
I DON'T have the service...but if your supposed to have 24/7 access...ask for a FREE extention when it goes down... Ask for one free month... If it is broken again the following month ask for another FREE month...maybe it will be BROKEN so much that you will get 5 years for your $80??? It would be easier than cancelling an signing up again, and again...
If you read this entire thread you will see that it's NOT just a matter of the site being down a few days. The thread starts with problems of wrong date, wrong score and some people not able to log on for weeks, not days. Someone did ask for a refund and didnt get it. That's just in THIS thread. That's my last post on the matter as well. Candi ps George I do love ya
Somehow this was one of those threads I stopped reading shortly after its initial appearance, so I missed the controversy, LOL. LKH sent me an email and asked my opinion, so here it is (like anybody else wants to know, lol, but what the heck): -- I don't think that re-upping for a 30-day trial repeatedly constitutes theft. On the other hand, I do think that a consumer's ability to do that really reflects poorly upon CreditExpert's business plan. I took another look at their Terms of Service tonight and was surprised to find that they don't even address the issue of limits in that document. That's unlike WorthKnowing.com, for example, which specifically limits consumers to one free report every 90 days, and that's stated clearly on the site as well as in their Terms of Service. (Of course, some people find a way to bypass WorthKnowing's clearly stated preference, but they do that knowing that WorthKnowing has taken a specific stand against such activity -- which IS stealing by practically anyone's measure.) Not only does CreditExpert not mention limits, they don't enforce any limit electronically -- which is odd since it would be so easy to track it by Social Security number. Apparently, CreditExpert either doesn't care, or the issue involves such a small number of consumers that they don't want to take the time to care, or they haven't even given the issue a thought. Frankly if Wal-Mart Superstore decides to give free "trial" donut samples every day, and some people then stop in like clockwork to take advantage of that trial donut, that's another cost of doing business and offering the samples. If CreditExpert wants to tighten up, they certainly can. Apparently they don't mind. I don't think it's up to consumers to take care of Experian's bottom line in this regard. -- People who reinitiate their 30-day trials with CreditExpert rather than paying the fee do lose out feature-wise, namely the site's ability to track credit scores over the long haul. I doubt these individuals are any more predisposed to defaulting on current loans, however. The logic behind that rationale isn't unreasonable, though: People who would deprive Experian of income might also be a subset of the population who would deprive others of payment as well. On the other hand a different logic might just as easily apply: People who are so compulsively careful with their money that they find loopholes (like this "trial" loophole) may in fact be even more careful than the average person in tracking money in general, and those people may be even more careful about debt repayment. Perhaps there's a statistically significant correlation lurking here in either direction, but I imagine it's not that strong if it exists at all. -- As for whether LKH is out of line in stating his heartfelt opinions, I would say "NO, HE'S NOT" as loudly as I could. This is a free country. This is a public internet. His opinions aren't unreasonable even if some of us don't share all of them. Plus, maybe he's right. After all, at the very least, I think most of us realize that CreditExpert's THIRTY-DAY TRIAL wasn't intended to be a THREE-HUNDRED SIXY-FIVE DAY TRIAL -- even if they haven't built it into their service agreement. This would suggest that this is a dilemma that would at least be of interest to academic ethicists and other philosophers. Frankly, LKH's opinion is worth thinking about, and a variety of opinions are always useful. That's it. I doubt anybody read down to here, lol. Doc
Doc, I read it all and CE does STOP the free trials eventually. I am living proof and I am probably the first one that mentioned you could do it over and over. I did it in Nov, Dec, Jan & Feb. Tried in March, I got a message to call an 800#. I called they said fax proof of identity such as bank statement or utility bill, I faxed my electric bill. I received an email about 2 hrs later thanking me for joining and it stated "You have already used the 30 day free trial etc etc". I had to pay and am paid up to March 2003...all good things must end!!
Interesting, Christi, so they basically impose a limit eventually. Well, that's certainly their prerogative. In that case, I like the way they're doing it. They don't "legislate" it, but they do draw the line at a certain point. Good for them. So, basically, they leave the door open to the person who goes for a trial in January, changes their mind, decides in June to try it again but discovers it's still not for them, and then goes for it again in September (or whatever). Flexibility from a CRA -- who'd have guessed!? Doc
