willy2004

Experian False Names, addresses, SSN, etc..

Recommended Posts

Their "trade information" is a bluff as confirmed on consumerinfo.com that concedes the very obvious: We CAN "dispute" false items of identifying information including false names, nonexistent addresses and SS numbers that belong to other consumers. The FCRA ain't that bad after all, it was an Experian bluff...and it is far from over, but I am positive that it is 100% bluffing.

Here is what I have learned:

Experian is intent on maintaining as many "variations" as possible in a file.

(Lemme post and edit as that was not cool at all.)

The Comeaux case brings to light Experian's fraud that I have also seen, but I have not experienced a mixed file first hand. I have seen one first hand and lemme tell you, it AIN"T PRETTY. MOre on that below.

So, Experian...they want as many variations of your name as possible, and I am talking about FALSE names: The accurate name of the consumer is John Adam Waller and the false name in the file include Jon Adam Walls, Jonathan ....make up some names, but they are FALSE, names that belong to other consumers.

SSN variations speak for themselves, my friend with the mixed file had (may still have) one that is different with respect to each number at each position. (Comeaux had FIVE Social Security number variations.)

Addresses include nonexistent ones and "mixes" of different addresses. Imagine..3036 West Adams St. and 8017 E. Broadway Blvd. are totally different, one might be accurate or close to it, but then you will see a mixed address like 8017 West Adams St., nonexistent.

SO, Experian does not like to regard a consumer's "dispute" as a "dispute" of "any item of information..." subject to Section 611 and reinsertion guidelines which include notification, disclosure of the identifying information of the furnisher. See, there is NO furnisher, that is the point I think. Experian grabs this false information from computer programs or something, hypothetical typographical errors.

Ask for the "source" of the false names and see what they say.

An Experian Manager told me that when it comes to reinsertion, Experian regards "variations" as "trade information." Well, that immediately *grabbed* me as a rather purposeful, arbitrary category.

BUT, "trade information" sounds like "any information," so that is good.

I "dispute pursuant to Section 611(a)(1)" very false items of identifying information and Experian deletes them two days later (so that they don't have to notify the furnisher). Of course, this "expedited dispute resolution" requires a phone call to be placed to me, a bunch of stuff that Experian thinks that I don't even see towards the end of Section 611. No phone calls, no notice of reinsertion, no requirement of certification from a furnisher, just THROW THAT FALSE INFORMATION back on my file and HOPE TO GOODNESS I don't actually gain confidence that FALSE NAMES and other "file mixers" are actually "any information" in my "file." That is a verifiable *sh*tload* of violations after the Manager states that Experian does not interpret names, addresses, SSN as "any information," you don't wanna be wrong about that one, no no.

WELL, it all came full circle when I logged onto consumerinfo.com.

I did it because Experian was concealing the false names. My file is with one representative and trust me, it was concealment all the way.

So I got my CR online, that is how you do this, folks.

ConsumerInfo.com showed my "Personal Information" and there was a new false address. I linked on "dispute an item" or whatever it says, and it says that I can "dispute" any "underlined" item of information. Okay, here we go...so I concluded that they are in fact bluffing, and here is the KICKER:

Click on a false address and a notice comes up that reads "To dispute this item, you will need to call or write us." [/size

Now it made perfect sense! When Experian concludes their "investigation," they will delete the false address and refer to it as an "update" and not a "deleted" item of information. Don't pay attention to the words, that item was DELETED and is fully subject to reinsertion guidelines.

Now tell me if this does not make sense to you. It may not if you have not seen their tactics. They DO delete and false addresses is their mainstay I think, so they will refer to the address deletion as an "update" in order to fool you. They wouldn't want to publicize on their website that consumers can't "dispute" names, addresses, etc...and they don't publicize it. They DO require you to CALL or WRITE...hummmmmm. When you play the game with them, it will ring loud like a bell.

I won't make the legal arguments, but let's face it: a false name, false address or any variation of one's identifying information creates a higher risk of file mixing...ACCURACY and PRIVACY are both served. Meanwhile, there is no basis whatsoever for excluding these items of information from the broad category of "any information..."

Read through Experian's bullsh*t, their "Fraud Prevention" program includes notifying me of Social Security number variations, name variations...keep that crap OUT of my file, please Experian.

SO this is a topic for Local Advocates, I wanna crush these CRAS gang.

Link to post
Share on other sites

CYNTHIA COMEAUX, Plaintiff, vs. EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, Defendant.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:02cv0304

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS, MARSHALL DIVISION

2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10705

June 4, 2004, Decided

June 8, 2004, Filed

OVERVIEW: The credit reporting agency asserted that the consumer's claims under 15 U.S.C.S. § 1681i were time barred since they were not brought within two years from when any liability arose as required by 15 U.S.C.S. § 1681p. The magistrate held that the idea that a credit reporting agency (especially one familiar with mixed file cases, and put on notice two years prior by the consumer) to carte blanche accept the consumer's dispute that she was suffering from identity theft and not even investigate whether or not other potential causes existed (such as mixed credit files), or to correct any of the inaccuracies found in the file, created a genuine issue of material fact as to whether there was a willful misrepresentation that reasonable procedures were in place to resolve any credit file problems. The magistrate further found that the consumer had not only shown that her credit report was fraught with inaccuracies, but that the most harmful inaccuracy, bankruptcy, was either the sole cause or a substantial factor in the declining of her credit. Lastly, genuine issues of fact remained as to the consumer's mental distress claims and as to whether the agency had engaged in willful conduct.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

BACKGROUND

On December 11, 2002, Comeaux filed this lawsuit under Sections 1681e(B) and 1681i(a) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ("FCRA"), claiming that a mixed credit file has caused her to be denied credit with various lenders. More specifically, Comeaux claims that Experian combined her credit file with the credit file of another consumer, Mrs. Cindy Carr, thereby causing adverse credit that belonged to Mrs. Carr to be placed in Comeaux's credit file. Some of the inaccurate and derogatory information in Comeaux's credit file included: misspellings of Comeaux's name; that she had filed Chapter 7 bankruptcy; a listing of at least 70 trade lines and collection accounts; that she was married to another woman, Bridget, who is Mrs. Carr's teenage daughter; a listing of Mrs. Carr's home mortgage; that she had joint accounts with Louis Carr, Mrs. Carr's ex-husband; that she worked and lived in New Orleans; a listing of false telephone numbers, employer data; and finally, five different social security numbers, with only one [*3] being Comeaux's.

Comeaux did contact Experian several different times in January and October 1999, and informed them that she might be a victim of identity fraud. There is mention in the record that Mrs. Carr also contacted Experian in 1997 regarding discrepancies in her credit file. Experian asserts that Comeaux never informed them that her file was a mixed credit file, and thus, placed a fraud alert on her file. Furthermore, Experian claims that Comeaux's personal identifiers (i.e. her name and social security number) are not so unique, which could have created the combination of two separate files. These similarities are proof, according to Experian, that there is a need for flexibility in the Credit Reporting Industry.According to Comeaux, she was advised about various derogatory date found on her credit report when she was denied a loan by Hibemia National Bank in late December 1999 or in early January 1999. As a result, Comeaux contacted Experian as well as two other national credit reporting agencies. Comeaux's dispute communications with Experian began on January 4, 1999, when she telephoned and faxed Experian a request for a copy of her credit file. See Comeaux's 11-11-03 deposition, pp. 86-97, 100-101, 108, 110-111, 160 ("Comeaux's depo."). Comeaux further asserts that she telefaxed a copy of her January 4, 1999 Trans Union credit report to Experian that same day, and "marked up" or circled, what she believed to be errors in her credit file. See Comeaux's depo. 11-11-03, pp. 113-136. Comeaux expressed her concern with Experian that someone may have stolen her identity.

In a January 6, 1999 letter, Experian stated that they did not process any credit report disputes made by Comeaux because Comeaux's social security number did not appear on the file. See Experian deposition [*10] of G. Mathews, Vol. 2, 1-29-04, pp.95-99 ("Experian depo. G. Mathews"); see also Comeaux depo, Exhibit 2, pp. 86, 88-89, 99. According to Comeaux, Experian instructed her to fill out a social security administration form and return it. See G. Mathews, Vol. 2, p. 95-99. As such, Comeaux's dispute letter was filed away in their mail room. See Id. at 97; see also Exhibit 9, p. 1 of Experian deposition of S. Stafford ("Experian depo. S. Stafford").

Comeaux has produced evidence that Experian did in fact know who she was and which credit file contained her credit data. See Experian depo. S. Stafford; see also Experian's Administrative report and 7X reports, p. 1, EXPO12. Page one of Exhibit 9, as referenced above, indicates that Experian had an identifiable "PIN #" associated with Comeaux credit file, and that Gloria Mathews, an employee of Experian, added a perfunctory fraud alert to Comeaux's credit file on January 4, 1999 (likely in response to Comeaux's concern that her identity had been stolen), and refused to process disputes, claiming that Comeaux's social security number did not appear on the file. Contrary evidence to Experian's reasons to "shelve" or delay any efforts to [*11] process Comeaux's disputes has been produced by Comeaux in Experian's Administrative report and 7X reports ("7X reports"). See Exhibit 9, p. 1 of Experian depo. S. Stafford.

Experian's 7X reports show that Comeaux's credit file contains her identifiable "PIN #" and that numerous name row elements contained in that data file list Comeaux's social security number. See Experian's Administrative report and 7X reports, p. 1-2, EXPO144-0145. According to Comeaux, Experian did not need Comeaux to fill out a social security administration form in order to find her credit file. Gloria Mathews was able to retrieve Comeaux's credit file under Comeaux's identifiable "PIN #." See Experian depo. G. Mathews; see also Jensen v. Experian Info. Solutions, Inc., 2001 U.S. Dist. Lexis 15134 (U.S.D.C. E.D. Tex. 2001).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I pulled my Experian report yesterday and attempted to dispute mostly my personal information which was INACCURATE via their online dispute option. Like you said it states that you can dispute anything that is underlined however when I clicked on the addresses I was told to call or write. So I disputed some inaccurate phone numbers and employers. This morning they were gone. So I called them to dispute the TWENTY addresses they have listed on my account. Mind you some of them are entries of 3-4 VARIATIONS of an address. They even had a NY ADDRESS W/ A NY ZIP CODE listed in MIAMI. They have my current address listed 4 different ways and the rep told me that they had to remain that way because its how the creditors reported them. Every address I attempted to dispute she gave me the creditor that reported it and told me that if I had a problem with it I would have to contact the creditor directly and have them request it be deleted! She was a real @$#%#@. What is the deal with these people????????

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yemaya, this is a serious consumer issue.

The procedure below should allow you to dispute the addresses and get them "deleted," though Experian will guise the deletions as an "update" in order to reinsert the false items.

Save the documentation.

---------------------------------------------

Print out a copy of the page on consumerinfo.com that states you may dispute any underlined item. Attach that page to a dispute letter and state that you are disputing the following addresses on the grounds that they are inaccurate as they do not exist. Demand for DELETION of the false addresses. Experian will delete the addresses though they will guise the deletions as an "update" while failing to list the addresses.

Save the documentation.

Send another letter requesting the following:

With respect to Experian's investigation described on page ___ of my consumer report dated ______, please provide the following information:

With respect to Experian’s investigation of the items that I disputed on _____, please provide the following information:

(1) Please state each “Residence” that was investigated (I notice that every other consumer report that shows investigation results actually lists the items. I perceive this failure to be very purposeful given that many items were deleted.)

(2) A description of the procedure used to investigate each disputed item

(3) The business name, address and telephone number of any furnisher contacted in connection with each item of information.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

When a bunch of consumers come together and show a law firm that this is IMPORTANT, the policy may change, but not until then.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I called EX today after reading the post.

My experience was frustating as there are 11 vaiations of my name 1 SS variation and 17 addresses --some are variations.

I spoke to EX rep and she said that anytime there was a creditor that used the address to send me a bill or notice they(the creditor or CA) report the address and the same for creditors that report my name incorrectly regardless if was actually my address or name. So, I said that I wanted to dispute them and start an investigation and her reply was "what addresses are not yours and why are they not yours?" I told her that I simply did not live there, she said that some (no exact number) would be deleted and she would send me a copy of what was left. She then added that they may be re-inserted if in fact a creditor or CA updated with them using that address even if it is being diputed as not mine ( regardless if the address is disputed and/or the CA disputed). HMM??

As far as my names there are 11 variations and she agreed to delete 3 and then I asked her how many variations are remaining? She reponded that there was 11 remaining. Well 3-11 is 8 right? "Yes." Well how is it that there are 11 remaining? Well there are actually 14 variations reporting and it only shows 11 on my report. So I asked "so you have information there that you are not disclosing on myreports"? Silence. Well how many address variations are showing? I asked her. " I am unable to count all of them because of the ...... ." What did you say? She then replied that I would be receiving the updated report in 7 to 10 days.

What is really going on and how does one request to see all of the information they are not disclosing to us little guys?

How do I fix this?

Anyone?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Folks, as usual, I'm confused. Doesn't the FCRA in section

623. Responsibilities of furnishers of information to consumer reporting agencies

require the OC or CA to report accurate information? If we tell them that its inaccurate and they still report it, can't we nail them for it? The way I read it, we don't even have to tell what the accurate information is...merely tell them that they've got it screwed up and we found it on our CRA.

If I'm reading this right, this should be a way of telling an OC "it ain't mine".

What am I missing?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes this seems to be a recent problem with EX. 8 months ago I had no problem getting my addys updated with them. Now when I am trying to assist my 70 yr old FIL to update his addresses, I am hitting a brick wall. The man has lived at the same address for 30 years!!! What does he have to do to get it corrected? Is it worth it to file a suit? I have filed a complaint with the FTC. Who else should we complain to?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I sent a brief description of Experian's policy to the attorney that handled the case above. (I only provided excerpts from the case.):

Mr. David Szwak, Esq.

Bodenheimer, Jones, Szwak & Winchell, LLP

401 Market St. Suite 240

Shreveport, LA. 71101

My belief is that Experian will not change its policy based on consumer complaints. It will take some litigation to change this policy.

The reinsertion w/out notice is a serious violation, in my opinion.

FIRST, I suggest requesting the "source" of each false item FIRST.

SECOND, I suggest committing "disputes" to writing regarding false names, addresses and SSN.

(this will get you an updated copy of your report that shows deleted addresses referred to as an "update")

THIRD, requesting a description of the procedures used to investigate the items, a list of the items that were investigated, the business name, address and tel # of any furnisher contacted in connection with Experian's investigation of each item of information.

Lastly, keep an eye out for reinsertion of previously disputed/deleted addresses. It is the addresses that Experian regards as "updated" in order to escape its obligation to notify the consumer of reinsertion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I sent a brief description of Experian's policy to the attorney that handled the case above. (I only provided excerpts from the case.):

Mr. David Szwak, Esq.

Bodenheimer, Jones, Szwak & Winchell, LLP

401 Market St. Suite 240

Shreveport, LA. 71101

My belief is that Experian will not change its policy based on consumer complaints. It will take some litigation to change this policy.

The reinsertion w/out notice is a serious violation, in my opinion.

FIRST, I suggest requesting the "source" of each false item FIRST.

SECOND, I suggest committing "disputes" to writing regarding false names, addresses and SSN.

(this will get you an updated copy of your report that shows deleted addresses referred to as an "update")

THIRD, requesting a description of the procedures used to investigate the items, a list of the items that were investigated, the business name, address and tel # of any furnisher contacted in connection with Experian's investigation of each item of information.

Lastly, keep an eye out for reinsertion of previously disputed/deleted addresses. It is the addresses that Experian regards as "updated" in order to escape its obligation to notify the consumer of reinsertion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.