Jump to content



Recommended Posts

Sorry if this is redundant. I know there is a lot about this on the board, but I want to make sure I'm right on this.

I know that many CA's make soft pulls on your report and that those are legal. I'm not concerned with those since they don't affect my score or are not seen by others.

What I am questioning is a hard pull. Now, if the CA cannot prove the debt with adequate documents, would that also mean that they are not legally able to do a hard pull ?

The company I'm DV'ing has only done a soft pull so far, and I've since opted out. I have read other posts on here about CA's doing hard pulls (even multiple ones) after receiving dv. Now I know that they will do what they want, but if they make a hard pull are not able to validate, can I force them to remove it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the NCO-Merchant's account we were discussing on the other post. If they do this, I don't really want to sue them unless I'm forced to. I'm not worried about this so much from a scoring standpoint. We are going to buy a house next year and I don't need a hard pull from a COLLECTION agency showing on my report. I'm sure that will make the lender aware that there is an old collection floating around out there. I'm afraid they will report the actual account( illegally because of the age). If they do, I should be able to get it off, If they're smart, they won't try this but I'm figuring that they may do the hard pull for spite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys got it all wrong.

I could go to court and prevail on an issue like this, but you couldn't. If you wouldn't take the time to read 604, and obviously you haven't, then you wouldn't read the court's rules of procedure and they would beat you up so bad you would gladly pay them to go away.

It doesn't take a Vulcan to figure out the logic.

Inquiries cost a small amout of points. About 4-6 points for the first 6 months then 1-2 points thereafter for the next 18 until they fall off.

This causes problems.

Many creditors want to review consumer credit files to determine which consumers meet certain criteria for an offer of credit.

All creditors want to review consumer files to determine which consumers are complying with the terms of agreement, which consumers are morons and at risk for default, which consumers are in default and which consumers are worthy and deserving of credit line increases and/or lower interest rates.

Many consumers want to review their credit files to determine if accounts are reporting accurately, if their are derogatory accounts, to look for signs of potential ID theft, like different social security numbers and addresses, and to identify accounts that are the result of ID Theft.

Naturally then, all consumer credit scores would be in the 350-400 range as the result of so many inquiries.

What can be done?

The CRAs and congress decided to classify inquiries by type.

Inquiries made by creditors wishing to offer credit are promotional inquiries and coded as PRM.

Inquiries made by account holders and others to review an account for collection purposes, or compliance purposes, or to increase/decrease credit lines or increase/decrease interest rates are account reviews and coded as AR.

Inquires made by consumers wanting to monitor their credit files are coded as ARM.

Inquiries made by certain government, national security and law enforcement agencies also have a code, but I've not seen one and don't know anyone who has so we don't know what they are.

These inquiries are special because they do not impact your score and they only appear on one kind of report, a consumer report. They do not appear on a credit report. You can obtain a consumer report by purchasing one from a credit reporting agency.

All other inquiries impact your score and are visible to both you and anyone who obtains your "credit report." Your credit report is what you see when you look at an on-line tri-merge service like PG or MK.

A debt collector can make either an AR (soft pull) or a hard inquiry. Neither pretense is false if they have permissible purpose. To have permissible purpose they only need prove they have authority to collect. The fact that they cannot prevail in court to recover the amount of the debt is not relevant and makes no difference. A debt collector can make an inquiry even if the SOL has expired. So that means they only way to prove non-PP is if they are unable to produce an assignment agreement or a purchase agreement or if the assignment agreement or purchase agreement is invalid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

I had an account with MBNA that went into collection and charged-off in 2001. Like a fool I paid the full amount during the same year through a CA expecting it would improve my credit. Last month I contacted MBNA regarding a reporting error in this account that I closed in 2000. Afterward, a hard inquiry showed up in my credit report from MBNA. I sent MBNA letter asking them to remove the inquiry from my credit report since I had not applied for new credit. They sent me a letter stating this:

We are writing in response to your inquiry regarding the above referenced account.

To better service your account, MBNA reserves the right to make inquiries regarding your credit. This information is disclosed in your original Credit Card Agreement.

Thank you for making MBNA your card of choice. :evil:

Please share thoughts on what my next steps should be...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Okay, I followed up with MBNA on the fact that I did not have an open account with them and had not applied for new credit. Then again asked MBNA to remove the hard inquiry they made 3/27/06.

Their Reply:

You recently ask about a delinquency appearing on your credit report. The delinquency is accurate and will remain on your credit report.

What the heck is this! The only thing I inquired about was the reporting date of the CO. I sent MBNA a letter explaining that I did not recently ask about a delinquency appearing in my credit report. Waiting for a reply while at the same time disputing the inquiry with the big 3.

In the mean time, I called MBNA and was told that I challenged the validity of the account and that gave them the right. And, the inquiry will not be removed. Yea, I did 6 mos. ago through the CRA’s and it came back verified in 05. She assured me I had no legal right to get the inquiry removed.

As it turns out, the account # is not the original account #; they added some numbers on the end original account #, removed the original account # from my credit file and replaced it with the new one.

Did I give them the right to pull my CR by challenging the validity of the account a while back? Would a DV letter (modified for OC) be appropriate here? Any other thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • 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.