Jump to content

Impermissible purpose and legal standing to pull report


Downto0
 Share

Recommended Posts

A JDB sued me and the case was dismissed for lack of assignment which basically equates to lack of standing.

A couple of years has passed and I noticed that the JDB has recently been making inquires for "account review"...three. The strangest thing is that the account they have been attempting to collect has never been on my cr. So, what account are they reviewing?

Furthermore, since their case was dismissed for lack of standing, they also do not have pp to pull my cr.

I am in the process of negotiating a settlement out of court. If these negotiations fail then I will sue. The JDB has not provided assignment but this does establish that they do not have assignment. It is costly to send to the OC for assignment so most JDB's won't because it usually isn't worth it to them.

My question then is, what if the JDB does spend the money to get actual assignment? Does this give them the pp they needed to pull my cr before when they did not provide assignment?

I know if I am stopped by a police officer and asked for my driver's license and insurance card that I must provide both otherwise I will be issued a ticket and cannot drive the vehicle. It does not matter that I do have both and just left them in my other pair of pants. Not having them present when asked for is a ticket, nevertheless.

Is it the same with pp? The key thing is that I asked for assignment and they refused to give it to me. They made the inquiries after their refusal to qualify their standing to do so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A JDB sued me and the case was dismissed for lack of assignment which basically equates to lack of standing.

A couple of years has passed and I noticed that the JDB has recently been making inquires for "account review"...three. The strangest thing is that the account they have been attempting to collect has never been on my cr. So, what account are they reviewing?

Furthermore, since their case was dismissed for lack of standing, they also do not have pp to pull my cr.

I am in the process of negotiating a settlement out of court. If these negotiations fail then I will sue. The JDB has not provided assignment but this does establish that they do not have assignment. It is costly to send to the OC for assignment so most JDB's won't because it usually isn't worth it to them.

My question then is, what if the JDB does spend the money to get actual assignment? Does this give them the pp they needed to pull my cr before when they did not provide assignment?

I know if I am stopped by a police officer and asked for my driver's license and insurance card that I must provide both otherwise I will be issued a ticket and cannot drive the vehicle. It does not matter that I do have both and just left them in my other pair of pants. Not having them present when asked for is a ticket, nevertheless.

Is it the same with pp? The key thing is that I asked for assignment and they refused to give it to me. They made the inquiries after their refusal to qualify their standing to do so.

I'm not sure there's case law based on ownership of a debt and a permissible pull. It stands to reason must have a right to make a hard inquiry. There's probably case law related to debt collectors acting for the OC, but I'm not sure what's out there relating to JDBs who've supposedly purchased a debt.

Think about "assignments" regarding JDBs. The Bill of Sale/Assignment usually does not state a particular account. They would have to prove your account was in the bundle or portfolio they purchased. That might mean a computer printout with a gazillion other names redacted. Or they might have to provide an affidavit from the OC that your account was included in the portfolio.

What the JDB is willing to do might depend on the amount of your settlement or the amount you would claim in a lawsuit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The judge who dismissed their claim against me said that they would need more than a list with everyone else's name redacted. I think the JDB would need to send to the OC for some sort of affidavit with the OC signature.

But let's say that they come up with something that could pass as assignment. If they were previously asked for assignment but refused to produce and then made several account inquires on a non-existing account, are these still violations even if the JDB does come up with assignment?

My view is that these pulls are still violations because they did not produce assignment when asked and made the pulls regardless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The judge who dismissed their claim against me said that they would need more than a list with everyone else's name redacted. I think the JDB would need to send to the OC for some sort of affidavit with the OC signature.

But let's say that they come up with something that could pass as assignment. If they were previously asked for assignment but refused to produce and then made several account inquires on a non-existing account, are these still violations even if the JDB does come up with assignment?

My view is that these pulls are still violations because they did not produce assignment when asked and made the pulls regardless.

I honestly don't know if refusing to produce a valid assignment (if they have it), is a violation. Refusing to produce a valid assignment and not having one might be 2 separate issues.

It would seem to me that it would be a violation because it is your credit report, and you have a right to know if they can make a hard inquiry. The fact that the case was dismissed due to the lack of standing of the Plaintiff should be to your advantage.

Pro Se's have an uphill battle, especially if there's no specific case law. If you can't find case law, I'd talk to an attorney. Call your state's bar association. My state has a lawyer referral service. If I get an attorney's name through them, that attorney will give me a free consultation. It might be worth it just to get some advice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am talking with a NACA attorney but I've only mentioned the possible FCRA violations. I haven't gone into detail. I thought I'd pop the question here to see if anyone has dealt with the assignment issue.

The assignment issue could deal with a lot of other violations as well. For example, it is a violation to add interest and other fees if there is no agreement/assignment.

Has anyone asked for assignment and the JDB did not produce and then have the JDB come up with assignment because you had filed a lawsuit against the JDB?

Some of you lawsuit wizards???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The FCRA does not even recognize the difference between a "hard" or "soft" credit inquiry. Those are not regulatory terms.

When any party wishes to access your CR, they need do only one thing. They need, under FCRA 604(f)(2), to provide a self-certified reason for their "permissible pull" authority. The CRAs don't "police" or even verify these certifications. If the party certifies a reason for their permissible pull under any provision of FCRA 604, they can gain access to your CR.

Debt collectors normally certify permissible pull authority under FCRA 604(a)(3)(A) as being in connection with their "review of an account of the consumer."

A debt collectors inquiry becomes a simple coding issue with the CRA, and not an FCRA issue.

So we as consumers have two choices, we can be reactive and accept the law as it is written, or we can be proactive and assert our constitutional rights and lobby congress for a law that restricts debt buyers and collectors from obtaining our credit report.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You kind of touched on another related issue. There is no account for the JDB to review. It has never been on my cr. Red flags should have gone up. In Levine v World FINANCIAL NETWORK NATIONAL BANK the court said:

Experian would have us accept that, as a matter of law, its grave responsibility for safeguarding Levine’s confidential information extends only so far as a former creditor’s facially valid request for a credit report, notwithstanding any reasonable grounds to believe that the request is instead made for an impermissible purpose. We reject this conclusion.

Here the issue was about a closed account but the point should be the same about an account which doesn't even exist.

http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200416428.pdf

Back to my other question...has anyone had a JDB send to the OC for a bona fide assignment?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to the case I posted it would seem that TransUnion and the JDB are both liable. Levine originally sued the retailer, the lending bank, and Experian. Levine settled with the first two out of court but Experian contended that they did nothing wrong and decided to go to court on the issue.

The argument would be that the JDB gave improper pp and that the CRA should have known it.

I'm probably going to have to do a dispute directly with TransUnion to find out why they thought the JDB had pp. It is not likely a clerical error as the JDB has made three inquires over about a 6 month period. My guess is that TransUnion just accepted that the JDB had pp but the problem is that the pp was for account review rather than collections.

TransUnion should have done a search of my name and the account that the JDB was reviewing. This would have sent up a red flag because there is no account.

I plan on giving this violation the NACA attorney but I already gave him a mouthful with other violations this same JDB committed which are FDCPA and TCPA related. This violation is FCRA and a new can of worms to deal with.

I guess it's not surprising that no one has apparently had a JDB actually go after bona find assignment but it is conceivable that the threat of statutory and punitive damages along with attorney's fees and court costs have caused some JDB's to spend the lesser money to purchase assignment.

Has anyone had any personal experience or know of any court cases where this happened?

Edited by Downto0
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.