Jump to content

Getting ready to sue the CRAs for not removing judgments


Mannerheim
 Share

Recommended Posts

As I've mentioned previously, the CRAs are refusing to remove my vacated judgments from my credit reports. They have told me that they have been verified, and that the COURT has told them that they should remain on my report. After some pushing, the CSR agreed that the court did not tell them, but a third party agency that REPRESENTS the court did.

From what I've learned here, for the CRA not to directly contact the Court for their investigation, is a violation of the FCRA. I've reviewed the FCRA, and the closest thing I find is as follows:

----

(A) In general. Before the expiration of the 5-business-day period beginning on the date on which a consumer reporting agency receives notice of a dispute from any consumer in accordance with paragraph (1), the agency shall provide notification of the dispute to any person who provided any item of information in dispute, at the address and in the manner established with the person. The notice shall include all relevant information regarding the dispute that the agency has received from the consumer.

----

Technically, they did contact the party that "provided any item of information in dispute", that being Innovis/Lexis, etc. What they didn't do, is consider the information that they received from the consumer, i.e. the certified copy of the court order that I sent them.

I've never sued the CRAs before, so I guess I want to make sure my ducks are in a row before proceeding.

Any examples of lawsuits would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing amiss here unless you're disputing judgments which were improper to begin with, i.e. improper service, identity theft, etc. Should automatically drop off within seven years. The bureaus should be reporting satisfaction and if they are not you should pursue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No problem Mannerheim,

CRAs cannot parrot information. They have to go directly to the furnisher, the OC. There is plenty of case law concerning this subject. I had a similar problem with EXP using a 3rd party source to verify an item. However, they listed the OC on my credit report and I contact the OC, and find out that the OC never talked to EXP about my claim. Here are some threads:

http://www.debt-consolidation-credit-repair-service.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=19454&highlight=parrot

http://www.debt-consolidation-credit-repair-service.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=25447&highlight=parrot

http://www.debt-consolidation-credit-repair-service.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=543&highlight=parrot

Credit bureaus can't use 3rd party sources. (They use E-oscar and lexis/Nexis)

On the illegality of the credit bureaus using eOscar:

Cushman v TransUnion, Stevenson v. TRW (Experian), and Richardson v. Fleet, Equifax. The courts ruled each and every time that the CRA couldn't merely "parrot" information from the creditors and collection agencies...that they have to conduct an independent REASONABLE investigation to ensure the validity of the debt and the honesty/integrity of the creditor/CA in question. I hope this helps and stick it to them!! :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing with this is that the court has NOTHING to do with it. They don't report, they don't verify, they couldn't care less if this is on your report or not. Why? Because they aren't out ANYTHING and have no concern for what's on your files.

The bureaus pay this third party to go to the court house and buy daily filings. The courts like this because they get the mulah for it...that's about as far as they care. When the CRAs get that info, they plug in the numbers and - wah-lah - it goes onto your credit report (or someone else's sometimes)

The problem with this isn't that someone else is collecting the info. The problem (FCRA violation) with this is that the CRAs don't tell you who that third party is. By the FCRA, they have to put the furnisher's name and contact info so you can dispute with them. If Sally from Dallas goes to the courthouse and gets your records and supplies it to be reported, Sally from Dallas should have her name on the report so you can contact her about what information she gave out. Sally is the furnisher...not the courts.

Now...in our county, for example, our court says that Experian comes up there and buys the information themselves. Hmmm. That would make Experian the furnisher. Are they going to admit that? NO. But that's where the courts come in.

Go get 'em. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HI CM,

Thanks for responding. You're always a big help!

From all of the postings I have been reading, it sounds like I could very easily fall onto a slipping slope, which in the end, amounts to a bunch of tail-chasing, with no good result.

Should I just cut the crap at this point, and file suit in my local small claims court?

I have three judgments that aren't being removed after being vacated. Do you think that I can combine them all in the same lawsuit?

Can I file one lawsuit against Transunion, Experian, Equifax, Lexis/Nexis and Innovis (as co-defendants) for failure to comply with a Court Order.

Thanks again for your help!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing with this is that the court has NOTHING to do with it. They don't report, they don't verify, they couldn't care less if this is on your report or not. Why? Because they aren't out ANYTHING and have no concern for what's on your files.

The bureaus pay this third party to go to the court house and buy daily filings. The courts like this because they get the mulah for it...that's about as far as they care. When the CRAs get that info, they plug in the numbers and - wah-lah - it goes onto your credit report (or someone else's sometimes)

The problem with this isn't that someone else is collecting the info. The problem (FCRA violation) with this is that the CRAs don't tell you who that third party is. By the FCRA, they have to put the furnisher's name and contact info so you can dispute with them. If Sally from Dallas goes to the courthouse and gets your records and supplies it to be reported, Sally from Dallas should have her name on the report so you can contact her about what information she gave out. Sally is the furnisher...not the courts.

Now...in our county, for example, our court says that Experian comes up there and buys the information themselves. Hmmm. That would make Experian the furnisher. Are they going to admit that? NO. But that's where the courts come in.

Go get 'em. :D

So when Experian says that the courthouse is the furnisher and they are not.....I have a claim against EXP right CM??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.