cmo140

TRANSUNION Inquires

Recommended Posts

I have been searching for a while on bumping down these inquires, I am using CreditKarma for about a week and nothing has changed. Does CreditKarma work for that or just True Credit.

I been searching and I can't find that someone says it works for Transunion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It has usually taken 60 days or so to see movement with a single pulling service, 30 days with 2. You have a ways to go if it works at all at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't realize I was "bumping" when I was pulling my reports almost daily. I did notice that after some time, inquiries were falling off my reports early. My joy was short lived though as after about six months of having them all gone, they showed up again. I checked on this board to find that almost everyone's inquiries that had bumped off were showing back up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "time out" setting on the CRA web servers usually allows about 64 or 128 inquiries to get sent to your browser, depending on the CRA, and on the real time traffic to that server when you pull your report.

So, if you bump 64 times, sometimes you'll only see the latest 64 inquiries. The other inquiries are still on your records...you just don't see them via the web sites.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The "time out" setting on the CRA web servers usually allows about 64 or 128 inquiries to get sent to your browser, depending on the CRA, and on the real time traffic to that server when you pull your report.

So, if you bump 64 times, sometimes you'll only see the latest 64 inquiries. The other inquiries are still on your records...you just don't see them via the web sites.

So when a hard pull is done via a non-web site (like at a bank, for example), why are those INQs not there? If those INQs existed on a hard pull, I would probably be the first to agree with this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I could legally claim to be the author of such a system, I would explain that the CRA management (based on CRAPOLA guidelines) decided that if the terms and conditions under which the an individual's credit report is displayed specifically states that it is not intended to comply with the FCRA, then they needn't display all inquiries. I would further explain that creditors can choose to pay for "complete reports"...or "in-complete reports"...depending upon their internal policies.

Edited to add: I would also point out that CRA managment agreed with CRA marketing that by making it appear that soft inquiries push hard inquiries off reports, consumers would soon "discover" the "hole" in the system that would encourage them to continue to pay the monthly "monitoring" fee.

But, since I cannot legally claim to have authored their system, all I can say is your guess is as good as mine as to why the law states "all inquiries must be available for 1 or 2 years", but yet sometimes you can see reports that don't have all inquiries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I could legally claim to have authored such a system, I would have seen to it that it did only what was expected of it.

It is true that sometimes widely used systems do have bugs...but, once the system folks discover it, then if management wants them fixed...they're fixed.

If managment decides that there is some advantage to allowing the perception of a bug to continue, then the perception continues even after the bug is fixed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My conclusion is that everyone is right. The data is there, the time-out obscures the full scope, and that online apps giving instant decisions are vulnerable.

The fly in the ointment is this hard copy of my TU report from January with no December Inq's, vs. the one I got in August with inq's that pre-date the first one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I were legally able to claim that I was involved in the discussions, I would say that the CRAPOLA guidelines say that the FCRA can be intrepreted to mean that unless you specifically request a copy in writing, any "hard copy" you may receive need not comply with the FCRA.

Of course, I can't legally claim that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If I were legally able to claim that I was involved in the discussions, I would say that the CRAPOLA guidelines say that the FCRA can be intrepreted to mean that unless you specifically request a copy in writing, any "hard copy" you may receive need not comply with the FCRA.

Of course, I can't legally claim that.

What the fudge are you legally able to claim? LMAO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, I can legally claim that I am a Systems Designer. I can't legally claim that I designed any of the systems for the CRAs.

Is it because you never designed any of the systems for the CRAs, or because you signed NDAs for the CRAs? Admitting that you signed a NDA isn't disclosure, is it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that I read that CK does not work any longer for b*, period. Or, it does not work with TU?

Share this post


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