Jump to content

Who says CRA's are only a "data gathering receptical?!"

Recommended Posts

Looks like a "business relationship" to me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Anyone who said the CRA's are only a "data collecting receptical" with no vested interest one way or the other is FULL OF IT!!!!!!!!!!

This may explain why Experian is so hard nosed about inquiries.......... They're encouraging them (and assisting in it too...). They're advertising that they have consumer information that is tied to our SSN#'s to aid CA's in their harrassment.... SERIOUSLY?!

copy and paste:


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great........ And???? What was said??? What was the legality??? How are they allowed to use/sell consumer information however they want??? Because you spoke about it 2 years ago, a discussion can't be had now?! People ask duplicate questions here all the time.... That response was a bit "limited"....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great........ And???? What was said??? What was the legality??? How are they allowed to use/sell consumer information however they want??? Because you spoke about it 2 years ago, a discussion can't be had now?! People ask duplicate questions here all the time.... That response was a bit "limited"....

Am I supposed to retype every post in multiple threads on this subject over the years and months? Or do the searches to find the threads for you? :confused:

But no, there really isn't a big need for another conversation about it. We've all complained about it a dozen times, and that's all another thread will end up to be... going over old ground. You might as well search for the threads where it's all been said already. I honestly didn't memorize it all.

I'm not trying to be mean. I'm just trying to tell you this issue is nothing new, and you'd be better off reading threads that already exist, because the arguments/facts/information are already there for you to read.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm glad you posted it, Soccer.

I'm new and haven't been able to read all the archived posts...yet. It'll probably take months for me to catch up. Still, I'm reading all the current posts, picking through some of the old threads and trying to piece it all together.

Besides, sometimes we need to see/hear things in a new way or at the right time or even several times before it sinks in.

I think no harm was done by your posting and your willingness to contribute something constructive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ANYWAY, it was discussed yesterday and today in another thread. There was a thread about it in September. There have been several threads about it.

With all due respect, "Posting 101" makes mention of posting things that have already been posted, because it causes unnecessary clutter. When you start a thread, the field for the title reminds you to check if what you're about to post has already been posted. These rules exist for a reason on this forum.

I'm not going to get into a pissing match about it. Yes, posting duplicate threads about well-trodden ground makes things more convenient for some people because then they don't have to do as much work themselves. We get that. But we still request that you don't do it.

What you should do:

"Oh goodness, look what I just found! This is completely unfamiliar to me! I wonder if anyone's talked about it yet here! (Do search for key terms, like "Collection Advantage," or Experian Collection Agencies etc.) Oh, I see it has already been discussed. Let me add my thoughts to the thread."

What you should NOT do:

"Oh goodness, look what I just found! This is completely unfamiliar to me! I must immediately post a thread!"

That's the mindset that everyone should learn to have, so we don't have so many repetitive threads to wade through... because that situation doesn't help anyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly LNY, did I do something to personally offend you?!! Why are you being so rude and hostile???? How DARE you!!!!!!!!!!

I DID do a search and I didn't find ANYTHING to address MY QUESTION!!!!!! My purpose of posting this had nothing to do with just "shining light on the topic" and saying "oh my gosh"............ If you'll recall, I actually asked about the legality of it and how was it legally OK for them to compile and sell our information without our OK, to aid CA's in their efforts???? Even the "Opt Out" method doesn't stop it.... How is that OK??? I was of the understanding they're supposed to be a receptical for consumer information.......

If it's a topic YOU don't want to re-visit......... THEN DON'T!!!! Skip the thread!!!!!! Nothing good came of your comments.... They were neither constructive or helpful.....Frankly, your attitude is contradictory to 99% of the others I've encountered on this site in the 1 MONTH I've been a member.........

Maybe there should be a "disqualifier" before you post a thread saying:


Link to comment
Share on other sites

pbpb.... I'm glad it was helpful to you!!! I too am a new member and (usually) have found this site to be unbelievably helpful!!!! I agree there is a TON of information to be read on this site on a multitude of subjects.... And (again, USUALLY) the people here are really, really helpful!!!

Good Luck!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

but do you know about the law that allows it???

You aren't going to find one. But, that doesn't mean they can't do it - there doesn't have to be a law allowing something before it is legal to do it.

Regarding duplicate posts - there are probably about 10,000 posts here that mention the fact that a CA does not have to respond to a DV request within 30 days. Still, there are at least 2 or 3 new threads every week that addresses situation again. So, why is it now a big deal that someone addresses a previously discussed subject? If the goal is to eliminate garbage posts on this forum, why not start with the Off-Topic thread. There is more worthless crap in there than the rest of the forum put together.

There is so much bad information contained in this forum, especially the older posts, that it would be, in my opinion, a mistake not to seek clarification of something already "addressed." There isn't ANYONE who posts here who has not given bad advice at one time or another, or incorrectly posted something as fact. That includes Mods, old timers, lawyers, all of us. It's a mistake to suggest that information should not be questioned simply because it has been posted before.

Since court opinions play such a big role in what is discussed here, what is right one day can be wrong the next, and vice-versa. There is a good chance that information contained in old posts (that may have been correct at time of posting) may not be good today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Americkaner83..... Thank you for your attempt to help. The 3 links you provided do discuss the issue on some level, but do you know about the law that allows it???

I don't know about any laws that specifically allow it, but there are no laws against it.

The CRA's are a business. They exist to make money. They're not a public service or a government organization who merely collect data.

They collect data for business use, they sell it, sell access to it, sell subscriptions for receiving updates on it, and sell person finding (skiptracing) services.

We are not their customers, we are their money, and often a thorn in their side when we force them to follow the law and assert our rights.

This is why laws like the FCRA exist, because back in the day the abuse of the credit system was out of control.

At least now we have some laws and rights to fight them with.

But don't think for a minute that they care about you, care that their information is accurate, or care what you think. They only care what their customers think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok I think we all need to step back from the PC (or Mac) and take a deep breath.

First of all: Personal attacks, no matter who starts (or continues) them, are against the TOS of this board. Not only that, come on folks: It's just not nice. there have to be more productive things to do than argue on a credit website.

Soccer - Please understand what LNY is saying. LNY is trying to make a point that when posting, it is always a good idea to search and see if the same topic has been recently discussed. LNY is NOT saying that just because a question was asked a few years ago you shouldn't ask that same question...instead you should search and find that years-old thread. Nascar made a great point, that touched perfectly on the topic: there is a good chance that info that was posted a long time ago may not be valid today.

But LNY is saying that there are threads (such as the ones that I posted) that deal with the subject of the CRAs being "in cohoots" with CAs and the like. Please note that the threads I posted were started in October and September of 2007.

And it does get quite frustrating to see a thread that is very much similar to others that have been recently posted. As you continue to read and post here, you will have times you just want to throw the computer across the room if you find one more near-identical thread (trust me! Just search for "fico fako" and be blown away by the amount of threads)

Finally - regarding the "legality" of what the CRAs (especially EX) are doing...Nascar and Jasen hit it on the head: There is nothing that specifically denies it, so they do it. Until there is legislation that prohibits it, they will continue to do it.

I hope this made sense to everyone reading - I know that someitmes sarcasm and / or exasperation or different tones that would be interpreted correctly in person don't translate well to the written form.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amerikaner83...... I don't think anyone "missed" LNY's point...... However, he/she went on to make a point to making those of us who are new to this site feel as bad as possible with comments like "ANYWAY...." and "DO I HAVE TO DO A SEARCH FOR YOU?!!!"..... I'd think this site would do a better job of appointing more "level headed" moderators given the sensitivity of the subject matter we're discussing and the stress levels of the people who seek this site for "help" are under..... LNY's reponse was not much different than the attitudes of the CA's we are all dealing with.... So, as a new member, just be aware, no one is missing the fact that there are multiple posts on the topics discussed here.... Frankly, the whole topic of "Collections", "Credit Repair" etc.... is only so broad to begin with. I think Nascar put it best....

The issue at this point wasn't the post itself (frankly, no other post acutally DEALT with my question.... which is why I started my own thread)..... It was the disregard that LNY showed for others given his/her "moderator" status..... That was TOTALLY uncalled for............... Like I said before, skip the post if you don't want to discuss it.... That's the beauty of "free will". However, in this case LNY went out of his/her way to make sure I was made to feel TERRIBLE for asking a question that I couldn't find the answer to anywhere on this site.... I'm not saying the topic hadn't been discussed, but MY QUESTION hadn't, so (silly ME), I asked a simple question.......... If new members feel like they're going to be "attacked" for asking what a "moderator" feels is a duplicate issue, then what is the point of this site? New members will run to another source..... I think this site provides awesome help, but if people like LNY who have been around for a longer period of time feel that those of us who are "new" to this are "waisting their time" in some way by asking our questions...... Then close the site to new members!!! Otherwise, tell your fellow moderators to "back off!!!!".


Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK soccer, that last post (post #15) was not called for in any way.

LNY did NOT go out of her way to try to make you feel bad. LNY was not showing "disregard" for anyone...as I explained in my above post.

And for the record - you seem to be the only one who is now offended by LNY's post. It's NOT that big of a deal, we all are human. We ALL have misinterpreted something that has been said to us at one point or another have we not? I know I have.

Let's let it go and move past it, shall we?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although I have seen some posts over again and again, I honestly have to say that I would rather see an update, new information, or clarification on something current than adding to a 2 yr old post. I have no problems about threads either way.

If someone has a question, I give a quick abridged version of what I know now and try to link the post. Being here for a while, I know I've done searches and can't find the specific item after looking through everything. Sometimes some people can quote stuff off the top of their heads, sometimes not. If I can't find the info I'm looking for I will start a thread and hopefully have it answered in 1 or 2 posts. So lets all take a deep breathe.

Hey how about them Packers!!!! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WAIT.... Amerikaner83............ Are you telling me I don't have the right to be offended by LNY????? No offense, but I wasn't "asking"......... I was offended. Period!! I don't need "permission" to be offended...

I didn't "misinterpret" anything. LNY's response was rude and dismissive. No "gray area"..... He/she took several paragraphs to NOT answer the question!!!..... I was NOT the only one who felt that LNY was a bit "much"... Other people made the same point I did (including other moderators).... Basically, "multiple posts" aren't "NEW" to this site....AND if there's a topic you don't want to discuss.... DON'T!!! But even if I am the only one who was offended.... So! I'm the one who asked the question and got the snyde response....

Fact is, my question WASN'T addressed in any previous posts! Thus... My question!! My GAWD this is unbelieveable!!!! Does anyone else have to defend their questions like this??? I get a sarcastic, "piss off" response from a moderator who has seen the "topic" before (but not MY QUESTION)...... and I'M the one defending MYself?! So from now on... Anytime I see a post that deals with ANY issue I've seen before.... I can take several paragraphs to point out that their waisting everyone's time because the topic has been discussed many, many, many, many times before??? Regardless if their question has been addressed in ANY of those previous posts?? OK........ GOOD TO KNOW!!!!!!!!!!!!

Amerikaner83..... You mentioned the whole FAKO v FICO topic being done to death...... On how many of those posts did you attack the individual who posted the repeat questions??? Or attempt to shut them down???

Amerikaner83.... You're not dealing with ANY part of what I'm actually saying. Just "defending your own".... I was TOTALLY offended by the response LNY made. And rather than deal with that, now you're telling me I don't have the right to feel that way?!! I'm offended..... I won't make apologies for that. He/she couldn't pm me and address it that way??? Where I could quickly point out that while the "topic" had been discussed, my question had NOT been addressed previously?????

I was inquiring about "LEGALITY". What law supports it??? If it weren't for Nascar and jasen.... I STILL wouldn't have an answer to my question!!!! But LORD KNOWS, I'd feel stupid for asking it..........

Additionally, please note, I didn't solicit LNY's opinion!!!! He/she came to ME!!!! I saw the response you provided Amerikaner83 (and I THANKED YOU for your efforts), but THOSE DIDN'T ANSWER MY QUESTION EITHER!!!! Seriously, Amerikaner83 if you don't want to address the issue I'm acutally presenting (and you're not).... Fine! But don't start defending the behavior of someone who behaved badly..... it was rude. You say MY response was uncalled for?! You do realize that NONE OF THIS would be happening if your fellow moderator hadn't responded the way he/she did????? Or responded AT ALL for that matter!!!

I wasn't saying the topic hadn't been discussed.... it had. But MY QUESTION hadn't..... But I guess that doesn't matter, because I'm new and don't have the right to ask what I need to know???

YES! There are a TON of "repeat" posts........ But (despite the fact that this was NOT a repeat) I've NEVER seen anyone have to "DEAL" with it like this!!!!!!!!!!

I'm really offended (and disappointed). Last I checked, this is a PUBLIC forum to get answers to questions YOU CAN'T FIND!.... And, in the end.... I ASKED A SIMPLE QUESTION!!!!!!!

IMHO......LNY doesn't deserve "moderator" status.... And Amerikaner83... LOL..... WOW.... Nevermind!!! I really am SERIOUSLY disappointed..... What recourse do those of us who feel mistreated here have???? Do we just copy, paste, report?

WOW!!! This is REALLY unfair!!! NEW MEMBERS BEWARE!!!! I think I'm going to go to other boards for awhile............ This really left a bad taste in my mouth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, how 'bout the weather?

What's the difference between FAKO/FIKO? What is bumping? 8-)

OP - I have SO been in your shoes. I was in the same boat as you - searched several times - couldn't find a SPECIFIC answer and was responded to with sarcasm. Believe me - it's better to just get over it. Everyone is here to help. You may come accross someone who you don't agree with or that offends you. It will probably happen again.

There are plenty of helpful people on these boards. The longer you are a member, the more you will share the frustrations of the other posters.

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.