• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10 Good

About June

  • Rank
    Impressive 100+ postings


  • Interests

Profile Fields

  • Location
  1. Hello, For the record, some of us use the term "Inquiry," as if they are just obtaining our names and addresses only. But an "Inquiry" IS a "Hard" or "Soft" pull of our full Credit Reports by the Furnishers of Information. "Hard" Inquiries may legally remain on our CRs for 2 full years, and "Soft" Inquiries remain for 12 full months. By "SoExtremeJune"
  2. ALL states need an Attorney General like Andrew M. Cuomo. As a former citizen of New York State, I'd always liked Mr. Cuomo (and his dad). They appear to be "for the people of New York State."As a former New Yorker with family and friends still there, I would like to give special thanks to Mr. Cuomo's Special Assistant Attorney General Stephen Mindell, and Assistant Attorneys General Herbert Israel and Andy Lugo of the Consumer Frauds and Protection Bureau. You guys are great!
  3. June

    SOL question....??

    According to your message, it appears that your Date of Last Payment (DOLP) was 11/2003. Research to make sure that the OC had begun legal action on or before 11/2006. Admin says that if they did not follow the law, you may be able to have a Judgment vacated.For more information, Read this Article by Admin: "Do you have a Judgment against you? Find out FREE how you may be able to get rid of it without paying a dime!" Good Luck.
  4. Look, I had discovered this yesterday. Read this Letter by Dianne L. Wilkman, President, Springboard Nonprofit Consumer Credit Management: Ms. Wilkman "urges regulators to formulate and enforce rules that strictly govern the practices of all data furnishers, and would encourage a special focus on junk debt buyers and any sellers of bad debts." "Junk debt collecting is a settlement driven business model and the consumer is brought to the table by aggressive and often illegal credit reporting tactics. These tactics include failure to report the original creditor, the original open date and the date of last activity. These tactics can extend the reporting of the collection. Also, duplicative reporting of the same collection account after it has been sold to a 2nd or 3rd debt buyer is an issue. Recent years have seen the proliferation of junk debt buyers who prey upon consumers to collect expired debts or even debts that don’t belong to a consumer. Their method of collecting has as its primary strategy the tactic of immediately stinging the credit report in order to force a settlement, often mis-representing the debt as more recent than it really is and/or reporting the debt as revolving, which is inaccurate and which causes the score to further decrease since the “utilization factor” calculates higher than it should. If the consumer goes along and settles the debt this has the perverse impact of causing the credit score to plummet further (since activity has been updated to the current time period). Medical service providers, health clubs and other future service providers are also selling their charged-off accounts to junk debt buyers." For the complete letter, you may visit: FDIC: FDIC Federal Register Citations You all may find it very interesting !
  5. I know exactly what you're saying. Yes, I put the "Certificate of Service." That alone may work for you and you may feel comfortable with that. When I was pro se in any court, federal or state, I made sure that I mailed each and every paper by CMRRR. Should the defendant say, they did not receive my motion or paper, the burden of proof would be on me. So for my own protection, yes, I sent everything CMRRR or Priority Mail with Delivery Confirmation.
  6. It IS illegal on my credit reports, and will always BE illegal on my reports. If their "hard" Inquiries were so legal, the CRAs and CAs would not delete, once challenged. I am only voicing my opinion like everyone else here. Confusion. Confusion. I never said that they may not COLLECT. Their TL may remain on my report for the entire RTP. Where an account is beyond the SOL (for my state) to bring legal action, the CA may not Report it for the first time, Update to the current time period, and do "Hard" Inquries. This is misreprenting the legal status of the debt for me. Whether or not you or anyone here, agrees. More confusion. I never give legal advice and I never told anyone here to bring legal action on any issue. I have great success with my letters only. Well... I could say and will say, the entire time I have been visiting this site, I find that you have been entirely dishonest at times, arrogant, opinionated and must control each and every Thread on this site. My every opinion is always challenged by you (even where it concerns my own CRs). If I have an OPINION (or success) that differs from your legal advice, or fail to quote case law, statute or court decision, I am suddenly declared as being erroneous. You shall not control my actions, thoughts or opinions. Thank you.
  7. "In other words," I do not tolerate aggressive and illegal credit reporting tactics by the CRAs and Furnishers of Information. I NEVER give legal advice and I know what I am talking about, where my credit reports are concerned. In my state where the SOL is 4 years (Florida Statutes § 95.11), then Credit Reporting, Updating and INQs for out of statute debts ARE illegal (for me) because it is misrepresenting the legal status of the debt.§ 807(2)(A) of the FDCPA. False or misleading representations [15 USC 1962e] A debt collector may not use any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of this section: (2) The false representation of -- (A) the character, amount, or legal status of any debt; or... No, I do not have the case law, or even a court decision. That is for an attorney in court. I had been successful without court. Thank you.
  8. My final answer is this: If "HARD" INQs for Collections, (6, 7 or 10 old) debts, or debts that are out of statute for your State are acceptable and perfectly legal on your Credit Reports, then continue to allow the "Hard" INQs by CAs, JDBs and OCs. Which damages credit scores for two (2) years. On my Credit Reports, "Hard" INQs are ILLEGAL for Collections, and Out of Statute (after 4 years). Any and ALL illegal "Hard" Inquiries are removed without my quoting any law, statute or court decision. And you can believe that !!!
  9. As a least sophisticated consumer, I cannot quote law, statute, or court decision for everything in life or credit repair!!! I know this because based upon my CRs. "Inquiries that display to companies (may impact your credit score)." Only Credit grantors, where I had initiated a credit application are listed here, except for Forester & Gorbus. Duh!!! This statement is based upon my CRs. And the fact that it stands to reason (and common sense) that frequent Updates and "Hard" INQs would tell potential lenders that I am regularly applying for credit, and the alleged delinquent debt is within the SOLC for my state. This is based upon my experience and my own CRs.Any more questions???
  10. According to the President of Springboard Nonprofit Consumer Credit Management, (Riverside, California), DIANNE L. WILKMAN, we do. It appears that illegal credit reporting tactics are out-of-control. Ms. Wilkman states that: "We would urge regulators to formulate and enforce rules that strictly govern the practices of all data furnishers, and would encourage a special focus on junk debt buyers and any sellers of bad debts. They should be subject to strict standards of accuracy and integrity and onerous remedies for unlawful behavior. In general, we advocate that the Federal Reserve Board take the approach that direct dispute processes with all data furnishers need to be enhanced and not restricted." Also, Ms. Wilkman states that: "Damage has been done to the integrity of credit reporting and scoring from all sides of the credit granting and receiving spectrum: 1) from the credit bureaus who are in control of these databases and responsible for their accuracy and integrity and accountable to consumers, 2) from the creditors, collection agencies, and junk debt buyers who have employed incomplete credit reporting methods as a defensive marketing tactic, or unethical and even predatory credit reporting tactics that serve to manipulate credit scores deliberately, and lastly, 3) from consumers themselves who resort to aggressive or even fraudulent methods of credit repair to create a falsely positive credit history for themselves, albeit many times out of necessity due to unresponsiveness and irresponsibility on the part of bureaus and data furnishers." To read her entire May 21, 2006 Letter to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Board visit:FDIC: FDIC Federal Register Citations I thought it was quite interesting!
  11. That's what this Do-It-Yourself Credit Repair is all about. I believe that you are on the right track. When they Update your report, this means that FICO should not consider this disputed Account for scoring. And the CRA and the Furnishers of Information are required to re-investigate and solve the matter within 30 days. The "Consumer Disputes This Information" notation should not remain indefinitely. I know that's right!!! I too understand the FCRA enough to know when they are not following the law, or when something just does not seem right, especially when the account is NOT mine. When it appears to be wrong, it usually IS. I believe that your letters covered the points and facts that are needed or required for any least sophisticated consumer. Yes, see what happens. Good Luck.
  12. If the OCs and CAs are doing "Hard' INQs on debts that are out of statute, it IS illegal. Hard Inquiries are based upon the consumer's initiation of some application for credit or insurance, not collections. On my CRs, alleged Delinquent Debts without statute, do NOT have any pulls or Updates. That would be misrepresenting the legal status of the debt. On my CRs, Delinquent debts within statute, current and active credit cards, current and active lines of credit, and even good ol' Cap One will do a periodic "soft" INQ certainly not "Hard" INQs which remains on our CRs for 2 years.
  13. § 803(2) of the FDCPA, 15 USC 1692a, provides: (2) The term "communication" means the conveying of information regarding a debt directly or indirectly to any person through any medium. Where an Inquiry IS a communication between the CA and CRA, then an INQ (or pulling a consumer's credit report) IS a direct or indirect communication between the CA and the consumer. The FDCPA plain english of the term "communication," provides for communication, through any medium (that which is in the middle; a means; an agency). The CRA is in the middle as an agency. Therefore, any Inquiry IS a communication with the consumer. Be it directly or indirectly. Under the law it does not matter which. Where the CA communicates with the CRA regarding a debt allegedly owed by a consumer, the law requires the CAs "30-day Validation Notice" to issue directly to the consumer within five days of such communication. Fortunately for all consumers, the CRAs provide the exact date (mm/dd/yyyy) for INQs, directly or indirectly.