Jump to content

Riddle Me This, Batman.....


Recommended Posts

I've been an avid reader of CreditInfoCenter and have learned much. I've had much success however I am now in somewhat of a fix. I am hoping someone may be able to clarify something for me. Here is the situation:

Once upon a time I requested my Equifax file. I received it as well as a form entitled "Facts You Should Know." On it was a brief blurb for NY State residents stating that paid collections & satisfied judments would stay on reports for FIVE years (I would have typed the EXACT wording but of course when I need the reference I can't find it! Grrrr). Now TU, Experian and Innovis make no mention of this. I ask Equifax via phone. They say it's NYS Law. I ask TU, Experian and Innovis. They say it's only Equifax's policy. I go poking around NY Laws and find the applicable business law (NYS Consolidated laws/General Business Sec 380-j Prohibited Information). There is a treasure trove there! In detail it includes chargeoffs, collections and judgments.

Anyway here's the kicker. I am an active duty military member in RI. I have always claimed NYS residency since 1983. Have a NYS driver's license, NY license plates & registration, and NYS executed Will. I have also registered to and voted in NYS. I have 3 paid collection accounts past the 5 year point. In trying to get them off I submitted copies of all that and the applicable state statutes to all the CRAs. All I got were form letter replies claiming that the balances/statuses were all verified correct. Oh and I get a BS form telling me of the rights under the FCRA which I am aware of. Am I missing something here? I am in the mood to litigate since I went through this nonsense twice now with the same form letter replies. ANY insight would be helpful (as well as an idea of how to find an attorney in the appropriate field. Most only represent companies here!) Thank you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ANY insight would be helpful (as well as an idea of how to find an attorney in the appropriate field. Most only represent companies here!) Thank you

Time to sue - you can start your search for an attorney here - link: http://www.naca.net This is the website for the National Association of Consumer Advocates which has a search function for locating attorneys in your area!

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NYS law most definitely applies here !!

Send the uncooperative CA's an intent to sue letter and make it strong. Use the NYS statutes as that IS the law they should be obeying in this case. FCRA allows for state's laws to prevail, so you can't let them brush you off - its NOT just EQ's 'policy' - they're feeding you crap. You have to let them know you're NOT fooling around.

File a complaint with the NYS Atty General' Office, they can add some clout as the CRA's are violating NYS laws.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks everyone! It was interesting especially since one of the CRA's (I forget who) told me that that law applied to people who physically resided in NYS. That was the only sticking point I have. Being military does present its idosyncrasies. I've lived almost everywhere. By that logic I am also a resident of Iraq and Kuwait! :) But I wholeheartedly agree with you all. I do sense BS. I just wanted to find a way to be absolutely sure and prepare my solid ammunition before opening fire.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Pardon the new screenname. Forgot my fool password. Anyhow, since my last posting I wrote the three guilty CRA's, politely and painstakingly restating my concerns, observations, and the applicable federal statutes that back up the NYS statutes. Of course this time I get the same form letters. I have since mailed copies of everything to the NYS AG's Office and the FTC. I have received a reply from the AG's Office yesterday. I have also been lucky enough to find one NY attorney who appears to believe my situation has merit. Well, at least from his point of view since he has not experienced anything like this. I now ask for recommendations should AG mediation fail and I go to court: 1) Obviously I want the negative tradelines to be deleted. 2) I was thinking about punitive damages that mirror the Federal FCRA (e.g., $1000 per violation) since I see none from the NY statutes. I seem to be in gaps being a military member and a NY state resident. However as long as the negative lines are deleted, the cash, although nice, is not that necessary for me. 3) I noted a board writer here mentioning being given some "personal 800 number rep" by TU after a lawsuit with a 48 hr time delay in response. Someone else mentioned "cloaking" What is it and is it worth exploring? 4) Oh and before I forget, will the CRAs try to impose a "gag" settlement? In my mind, there are MANY military members in my situation and as far as I am concerned I do have the means to fire off news of these discoveries once I blaze the path (IF successful)? Thank you for your time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I missed the RA & GC in the general info boards. May I ask what the acronym represents? Also, is the ITS a letter from me telling those CRA boneheads point blank that I intend to sue or does it require to be sent by my attorney? I already told them that the FTC & NYS AG Office would be informed (which they were). Thank you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I missed the RA & GC in the general info boards. May I ask what the acronym represents? Also, is the ITS a letter from me telling those CRA boneheads point blank that I intend to sue or does it require to be sent by my attorney? I already told them that the FTC & NYS AG Office would be informed (which they were). Thank you

An intention to Sue [iTS] is one last try at getting them to do what you want. In some cases, some may even ask for a settlement without even having to file suit. You are the one that will file suit at your local courthouse. You can call them or research via Internet and find the Small Claims Court forms you need to fill out. Some even send a copy with the ITS. Its used as a stick to get the Saps to comply with your requests. You have to be willing to follow through with suit. This way you become the hunter and control what happens.

Good Luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Here is an update regarding my battle against TU, EXP, & EQ.

I wrote a detailed letter to each CRA stating I am active duty military and a NYS resident and that under NY state law certain items had to be deleted. All letters sent certified. Of course the CRAs sent me form letters talkin' about the federal CRA completely ignoring my claim under state law. They state (like parrots) if I am physically in NY, then I do not fall under NY state law. Then I sent a letter requesting assistance to the NY State AG with copies of all correspondence to the CRAs. Also sent a copy of everything to the FTC for their bureaucrats. This was in NOV 2003.

Status thus far: The NYS AG moved fast God bless 'em. The FTC sent me a form letter. Exact same one I once received FOUR years ago. ::yawn:: Lazy Rat-B*st*rds. At least change a word or two, guys...... Anyway

TransUnion - Before: 5 tradelines cited

After: 5 deletions made.

Equifax - Before: 3 tradelines cited

After: 2 deletions made, 1 tradeline account number changed in order to skirt the NY law (AG notified of this today), and my address royally screwed up after being sent my driver's license copy four times (I am ok with this since it only adds fuel if litigation occurs). I'll give them 2 weeks good faith (well I am on vacation then) and see if I'll need to litigate Experian only or BOTH EQ and EXP. Interesting thing: Was told that if I use any other address other than my NY address than all deleted items will reappear.

Experian- Before: 5 tradelines cited

After: 3 deleted, 2 continues to be reported. According to EXP, Citibank was a paid claim by the government and not me (and therefore does not fall under NY law). FCNB Mastertrust was settled and not a paid collection (therefore does not fall under NY law). I think its crap and have told the Sr Bureaucratic Paperpusher so, that I will let a NY state court decide this. This arrogant fool said ok, see you in court. Interesting thing: Was told that if I use any other address other than my NY address than all deleted items will reappear as in EQ.

All in all, not bad. Almost there. Have an appointment with an attorney this week who does find this interesting. The thing that gets me is the corresponding with the CRAs only with my NY address. Any thoughts on this and the FCNB settlement / Citibank paid claim positions put forth by Experian? Any insight would be appreciated. Thank you all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A couple of random thoughts:

Have you spoken with the AG's office (or whatever they call legal counsel in your branch of the service)? Those folks are pretty up on consumer law and the know the soldier's and sailors act cold. A letter from them might help with the residency BS you are getting.

When you do speak to a private attorney, stress the fact that this case has lots of jury appeal. It is not nice to play games with members of the military when we have a war/conflict going on. Also, if you have been denied credit or are being offered credit at a higher rate because of these reports, be sure to mention that to the lawyer as that will mean $$$.

Good luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have touched base with the local JAG. Although knowledgeable of the Federal FCRA he was not too proficient with NY law. In fact he was surprised at the revelation of NY's 5 year Purge Law as well as the existence of Innovis. He stated that the S&S's Act would not be able to help me out in this regard and although it may give me a sliver of an argument it was wiser to stay in the NY law battleground and not give the CRA's any method to drag me out into federal territory.

I will see my civilian counsel and I did drop that bug in his ear. As we say in the Navy, Steady as she goes......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 3 months later...

Please pardon the long delay. Essentially in a nutshell I:

1) wrote a clear detailed letter step by step explaining what I disputed. What was wrong and what it should say and why. The letter included enclosures (i.e., copies of military ID, documents stating home of residency, license, registration, voting records, state tax records, copy of applicable state laws and the portions of the FCRA that allows it to act). Sent it CMRRR. Waited for responses. I received crap replies so...

2) Sent in second letter restating my disputes. It clearly stated that it was the second letter. Again stated the applicable state and federal laws. Copies of enclosures sent in again. Noted that I was keeping records for future action if necessary. Sent it CMRRR. Waited.

3) A couple of the CRA folded, some were still resistant. Wrote letter to FTC, and my state AG's office. Enclosed copies of letters, enclosures, and return receipts. The AG willl act as mediator but the CRAs don't know this.

4) The OAG calls me and we correspond. They send me copies of correspondence sent to the CRAs.

5) Other CRAs fold. All except Experian. Many phone convos between me, and the NYS OAG. All convos with Experian is documented in letters. Paper trail is important here.

6) Experian does not budge. Look up lawyer on NACA.NET. Had conference with him. Remember, keep it in state court not federal.

7) Lawyer takes case. Writes letter to Experian. After receipt of letter, Experian folds.

There ya go. Only caveats afterwards is this. 1) I now have a personal idiot savant in each of the CRAs to act as my CUSTOMER SERVICE SPECIALIST. No one else will touch my files. and 2) All correspondence to the CRAs must have my NY address attached to it regardless of where I am at in the world and 3) Keep tight watch on your files afterwards.

There ya go. Sorry for the delay

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a question. Where does it say that NY's Purge Law is trumped? I may be missing where it says so in the FCRA but the Purge Law was in effect prior to 96, when the Concumer Credit Reporting Reform Act was enacted. Either way, I agree with you. Better believe I'll keep a close eye on these knuckleheads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.