[DUSTY]

Is there anywhere to find what companies use what CRA to pull CR's
I need to submit credit app with a company that uses EXPERIAN, nothing like being able to prove damages!

EXPERIAN just refused to reinvestigate whether I had a BR after I told them I never did and yes I recorded it. Just need some disapprovals re BR! Those no good #)&(_%*#^@!

[hannah]

Originally Posted by DUSTY

Is there anywhere to find what companies use what CRA to pull CR's
I need to submit credit app with a company that uses EXPERIAN, nothing like being able to prove damages!

EXPERIAN just refused to reinvestigate whether I had a BR after I told them I never did and yes I recorded it. Just need some disapprovals re BR! Those no good #)&(_%*#^@!

Does BR = Bankruptcy? As for looking for a company that pulls from Experian, go join this yahoo group and you can find who pulls what in what states...

[JayinGR]

creditboards also has a credit pulls database

[spinn]

http://www.whogavemecredit.com/

That site does exactly what you are looking for.

[DUSTY]

Hannah, yes my wife bankruptcy alone.

This was a credit card that only my wife was responsible for, I remember she was so proud. OC changed me from 'cardholder' to individual responsible and reported on my CR's that it was discharged in BR.

I called OC who had purchased the FLEET cards (possibly before default?). They verified with all 3 CRA's yet admitted to me they had no records to verify with. (no not recorded)
I've gotten pretty good at deletes and got it deleted on 2, but EXPERIAN refused (on tape) to even try to see if I ever had a BR. That's not an unusual or difficult request. They're showing BR on my wife's CR and they act like they couldn't begin to guess whether I ever had.

So I'm damage shopping, need a credit reject citing BR as a reason. Right?

[hannah]

Originally Posted by DUSTY

So I'm damage shopping, need a credit reject citing BR as a reason. Right?

I don't ever judge people on their credit reports or that they can't pay or even question their ethics on not paying a debt truly owed as everyone has personal and private reasons and I just try to answer questions to the best of my knowledge. That said, I cannot quite get my head around shopping for damages. In my world, you either have damages or you don't. If you want to get a turn-down for credit to show a court that you were damaged by being rejected on the basis of a BK showing in a tradeline on your CR, you'd best make sure that the stated reason is that the rejection was indeed because of the inaccuracy of a BK and was not based on the number of collection accounts, etc. If the creditor you shop is only interested in your FICO score, one tradeline saying discharged in BK won't matter all that much. If you need it only for leverage to remove the tradeline, then do it if you think it will help.

[DUSTY]

First, I don't understand about debt truly owed etc... my wfe was solely responsible and declared BR. If an OC wrongly has a BR on my report I'm clearly entitled to statutory damages.

In this forum we discuss disputing 'debts' and I've never disputed a debt I owed. I've never got $1 for any case or settlement, I've never sued anyone or been sued by anyone.
So in this case anything about debts owed and what we dispute I just don't get. I'm not wearing any badge of courage for getting $$ for beating a JDB/CA either,
I'm just trying to get a frick'in TL for BR off my record that doesn't belong.

I agree that I would likely have to produce a credit denial indicating the BR as the primary reason for additional damages.
'damage shopping' was a bit blunt, but Experian just told me they wouldn't check out the BR. It was enough to evoke an appropriate although blunt reaction, but don't take that as an apology.

Furthermore, thank you for the comment, because it's always appreciated and it proves that we're not a bunch of 'deadbeats' trying to get money by screwing the system.

[direred]

Leaving aside Hannah's point (a good one), here's some creditors who seem to always pull EX:

1) WFNNB
2) Nordstrom
3) Macy's
4) The MBNA cards from BofA (e.g. the Mastercards)

Amex has been pulling EX a lot lately.

Good luck finding the answer you need.

[hannah]

Originally Posted by DUSTY

First, I don't understand about debt truly owed etc... my wfe was solely responsible and declared BR. If an OC wrongly has a BR on my report I'm clearly entitled to statutory damages.

I was not referring to your wife's debt, just debts in general that people know that they owe but cannot or will not pay. I was not referring to your case or to the statutory damages that you are seeking. I was referring to the fact that I have no bias either way on those scenarios as they can be different for different people but that we should not make up damages just to get the remedy we seek as then we would have to stoop as low as they do.

Originally Posted by DUSTY

In this forum we discuss disputing 'debts' and I've never disputed a debt I owed. I've never got $1 for any case or settlement, I've never sued anyone or been sued by anyone.
So in this case anything about debts owed and what we dispute I just don't get. I'm not wearing any badge of courage for getting $$ for beating a JDB/CA either,
I'm just trying to get a frick'in TL for BR off my record that doesn't belong.

No problem. I have spent years on these debtor forums and while I am all for getting the damages due you for violations, I think that trying to manufacture violations puts all of us in a bad light. I am not an attorney yet, but if I were and I had a client come to me with the proposition that he could manufacture violations, then that would present me with an ethical problem. Do you understand?

Originally Posted by DUSTY

I agree that I would likely have to produce a credit denial indicating the BR as the primary reason for additional damages.
'damage shopping' was a bit blunt, but Experian just told me they wouldn't check out the BR. It was enough to evoke an appropriate although blunt reaction, but don't take that as an apology.

I would hope that a properly worded dispute or an ITS, or even actually a complaint may provide the remedy you seek as the debt is clearly not yours as described and should not have been reported in that manner.

Originally Posted by DUSTY

Furthermore, thank you for the comment, because it's always appreciated and it proves that we're not a bunch of 'deadbeats' trying to get money by screwing the system.

Exactly my point. This forum is a way to empower you to be able to repair your credit, litigate a debt suit as a pro se, and to help with general or specific questions on how to do either one within the law.

[jlynn]

There is a large case on there against TU about reporting the BK's of another on a credit report. It may even be in our case law area. I bet a well drafted letter citing that case to both Fleet and EX will get the ball rolling to get the TL deleted.

[centex]

Originally Posted by jlynn

There is a large case on there against TU about reporting the BK's of another on a credit report. It may even be in our case law area. I bet a well drafted letter citing that case to both Fleet and EX will get the ball rolling to get the TL deleted.

I believe it was a class action settlement involving all three bureaus that involved reporting BK on a joint account when one person was not a party to the BK. Simply mentioning it in a letter was sufficient when my ex filed...no need at all to have to manufacture something to clog the dockets with...

[DUSTY]

for pointing me in the right direction. I'm certainly not trying to manufacture something, the violations are there already. I've told the CRA and OC I never had a BR and they refuse to investigate or change it. It was specifically worded as such in my EXPERIAN dispute. One CRA dropped it like a hot potato and the other verified it, but deleted after I talked to their General Counsel who must have checked and found there was no BR.

EXPERIAN has the info whether there was a BR and on tape I have their refusal to investigate it. That's enough to file on them and the OC with their violations, but like all of us do here we get 'giddy' and make a statement because we're personally involved and of course we want to take it out on the violator.

Centex, I do seek out deletion only, determining to only file if a 'violator' won't delete. I've never sought out money on an ITS or complaint because every time I start to write one, a last attempt gets deletion. That speaks highly of old AoC and this forum collectively and to all of you individually.

You are the voices of the collective subconsciousness.

[jlynn]

Originally Posted by DUSTY

OC changed me from 'cardholder' to individual responsible and reported on my CR's that it was discharged in BR.

Along with the TU class action - in a letter to the OC, you might also cite MBNA v Johnson....it will get their attention.

[centex]

The class action was Franklin E. Clark v. Experian (8:00-1217-24), Equifax (8:00-1218-24) and TransUnion (8:00-1219-24) and was settled in the USDC- SOuth Carolina, Anderson Division. Date of decision was 6/26/2002.

I never bothered to pull all of the documents. I had the mailer that was sent since I was in the potential class due to my ex having filed BK after we split up (no marital relationship due to pig-headed government decisions but that is another issue altogether).

The notice also indicated what remedies were available in the event that a BK reference either remains on or appears on credit reports in violation of the settlement. All three of the foregoing remedies are subject to the applicable limitations period under the FCRA. Any Class Member who knows that his or her credit report is or will be in violation of the Stipulation of Settlement agrees not to apply for credit or take any action that would cause the dissemination or communication of his or her credit report prior to the expiration of two business days after the Defendant receives notice from the Class Member of the violation. Any Class Member who believes there to be a violation of the Stipulation of Settlement with a Defendant should refer to the Stipulation of Settlement itself to ascertain the precise and full remedies available and procedures required to seek the remedies.

[jlynn]

Right, but if I read Dusty's original post right, he was never more than an AU, if anything at all. Fleet has taken it upon themselves to not only report the BK of another, but to label him as a responsible party.

Thus the reference to MBNA v Johnson, which, if I remember the argument in that case, would be a good correlation with the change in responsibility.

[centex]

As an AU, my recommendation would have been to go to the issuer (not the CRA) and direct that the AU status be removed. Once removed as an AU, then the reporting issue takes care of itself.

This is a matter that I would like have been able to resolve inside of three phone calls and a fax to the general counsel for the issuer. The CRA is but a bit player in resolving a matter like this...but, hell, you know me...I look for the expeditious resolution and am willing to use the telephone to speak with people.

[hannah]

All of the Franklin court docs are here.