baldman Posted March 7, 2007 Report Share Posted March 7, 2007 I recently heard of a new credit repair technique where all creditors are named in a small claims court lawsuit and asked to appear before your own local small claims court judge. The theory behind this is that when notifying them of the action you letter must include the fact that you are not filing for any monetary judgement at all. When they see this they decide that since no money is at stake then they dont bother. You show up and get the judgement against them and send in the court documents to have your file immeaditley updated and get your credit cleaned up fast. My question to you pros is is there any truth to this and has anyone heard of it that wouldnt mind offering more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lyle7289 Posted March 7, 2007 Report Share Posted March 7, 2007 I dont think so....but if you try it...let us know how it worksd out for ya.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SecretAgentWoman Posted March 7, 2007 Report Share Posted March 7, 2007 I'm having a hard time imagining a judge falling for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Craig Posted March 7, 2007 Report Share Posted March 7, 2007 I dont think so....but if you try it...let us know how it worksd out for ya..Dito - I see the word "fast", I think not. If you have mistakes or out dated information on your credit report. The it easiest way to correct, is geting satisfaction letters from the accounts that appear open. You then forward the sat letters to the credit agencies.Many times I have disputed wrong information off borrowers credit reports, the quickest turn around was two weeks. It averages about four weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the aussie Posted March 7, 2007 Report Share Posted March 7, 2007 If there is no monetary award being sought....for what action would you file suit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
divemedic Posted March 7, 2007 Report Share Posted March 7, 2007 Actually, this won't work. You sue them, but for what? What cause of action? Even then, you winning the suit would not bar them from reporting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zwiepak Posted March 8, 2007 Report Share Posted March 8, 2007 I don't know, I wouldn't count it out just yet... You can sue anyone for anything, of course, on the other hand, if it were that simple, everyone would be doing it...I would imagine you could make up just about any suit you wanted, as long as it wasn't obviously frivolous and had, at the very least, SOME basis of reality. I don't really see anything wrong with the mechanism. For example, I would imagine you could sue them for let's say, violating the FCRA in some respect or other, don't think it matters as long as you can make the accusation, and again, preferably claim something realistic, and they're not there to answer... I would imagine, if a judge ruled in your favor, and what you were asking for was deletion, I would like to think the CRA's would have to honor that until, and if, the creditor makes an appeal if it can... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
divemedic Posted March 8, 2007 Report Share Posted March 8, 2007 Do what you want, but let me point out a few things:1 The FCRA has no right of private action2 You need a cause of action to sue. 3 You are counting on the defendant not to show up4 even if they don't, small claims cannot issue injunctive relief, so the CRA won't delete even with a default judgment5 if they do show up, they will try to have your claim dismissed for lack of a cause of action6 if they succeed (and they will- FCRA has no private right of action), they will press for attorney's fees, and the court will most likely ask you to pay7 Florida also has a vexatious litigant statute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zwiepak Posted March 8, 2007 Report Share Posted March 8, 2007 Do what you want, but let me point out a few things:1 The FCRA has no right of private action'nuff said...There goes that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
divemedic Posted March 8, 2007 Report Share Posted March 8, 2007 Except s-2(, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimber6337 Posted March 8, 2007 Report Share Posted March 8, 2007 Not to mention the really pissed judge for taking up his court for essentially "nothing"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts