Hi all! I am a member of Creditnet and have heard raves about this board. I'm hoping to learn more here, and help others.

My question for Christine is about lawsuits.

First Union has refused to give me validation for an unauthorized inquiry, as well as Bank of America.

How hard is it to sue? Can you sue for deletion and not money?

Welcome, Author_22, you ask some good questions - as usually, I've got more questions than answers myself.

Did you send them a letter requesting they supply you with the "permissible purpose" and they didn't respond?

That depends on the court. I pay only $16 plus the cost of mailing the papers to the defendant via certified mail with restricted delivery.

You need to make sure that you mail to the "statutory agent" or "legal representative" -- various States have different names.

See my Fair Isaac Small Claims complaint for an example of the Arizona Small Claims form.

EVERY State has VERY different rules -- customs vary even by county. In Arizona some counties have mandatory mediation, some don't.

In the California and Arizona Small Claims courts I could ONLY sue for monetary damages.

BUT, often the defendant will FIX the problem to settle the suit. However, I always had to put a $$$ figure on the form.

To actually sue for deletion you probably have to sue in "real" court. And, I'm not sure the FCRA provides for deletion.

A few related links:

Trans Union on inquiries

FCRA: $1000 minimum for credit inquiry w/o permissible purpose

State - directory of States with on-line corporate data (who to sue and serve)

I'm NOT a lawyer and this isn't legal advice. I'm just *practicing* law with my own suits, hoping to get better, and sharing what I learn.

I'd be thrilled if I could get the bureaus to at least READ my Small Claims complaints.

Since you're NOT dealing with the CRAs, your chances are quite good if they really didn't have a permissible purpose.

Are you sure they're not promotional inquiries or account reviews?

Well, I wrote them the initial "not my inquiry" letter in August.

A representative called my house and told my brother that I had lousy credit. (a fact he knew, but still was a violation of my privacy.) They claimed in a letter they had to pull a credit report for a savings account application, but provided no proof.

I wrote a second letter asking for proof.

Ignored.

I wrote a third letter demanding proof and saying how displeased I was with them discussing my credit with my brother.

I got a very nasty letter saying that they don't need to prove I applied for anything, and that she never discussed my credit with my brother.

I won't say how I know (ex: whether I sat right there or it was recorded) but that is pure bulls!!!!

I have been debating for a couple of weeks what to do:

1) Let her win.

2) Write a real nasty letter.

3) Sue them.

Now, I did send PlanetFeedback and a letter to another official, but they automatically give her everything.

She's not an officer, but an assistant to someone else.

What should I do?

I have not had an account with First Union since 1996, and they claimed in the letters it was for an alleged application for a new savings account. I'm hesistant to share details, as I fear she might lurk. I have never heard or read such garbage from a company representative. She needs to go work for one of the big three.

Well, maybe not to you, but I think they do have to prove it in court. So, I would sue - after they failed to either provide a permissible purpose or pay the $1,000. From what you posted, I'd say you have an excellent case.

Was this BofA?

I'm going to try to send out my own $1,000 demand to Wells Fargo, hopefully later today, and I'll post it.

As far as them discussing your credit with your brother, that's a totally different story -- can you prove it, etc. The kind of thing that I'd hire a lawyer for if I had good evidence.

First Union:
That's a pretty simple situation too. You either applied or didn't apply. If you applied, they have to have the application.


The unauthorized inquiry is a Small Claims deal for me. Quick and simple - easily documented by the credit report inquiry. It's up to them to provide evidence of a "permissible purpose."

Via fax to 925-686-7551

John P. Weber
Operations Manager
Legal Process Department
Wells Fargo
Concord, CA

November 26, 2001

Re: Christine Baker - unauthorized credit inquiry with Equifax 07/19/2001
Please provide your permissible purpose for this credit inquiry or pay $1,000 by December 7, 2001

Mr. Weber:

I noticed that Wells Fargo obtained my Equifax credit file on 7/19/2001. As I do not recall applying for credit or banking with Wells Fargo in many years, I hereby request you provide me with your permissible purpose.

If you did not have a permissible purpose, please send your payment of $1,000 (as per the FCRA) to

Christine Baker
(address deleted)

Should I not have a satisfactory response by December 7, 2001, I will take legal action.

Sincerely,

Christine Baker
...@bayhouse.com
fax: 206-202-4653

--------------------------------------------

CONFIRMATION OF YOUR FAX TRANSMISSION
FAX STATUS: SUCCESSFUL TO 19256867551
COUNTRY: 1-NORTH AMERICA
TRANSMISSION: 27-Nov-2001 00:53:02 GMT.
DURATION: 1 Minute
TOTAL COST: $0.11

I almost quoted the Greenblatt FTC opinion letter, but I figured I'd wait until they respond.

Also, don't threaten with legal action unless you intend to follow through -- and you can bet I will. You could write "I might" or "will consider" or something like that.

I had filed my Small Claims complaint against Wells Fargo on 6/4/2001 and I can't imagine that I would have applied for anything with them. Banked with them in the 90s and HATED Wells Fargo ever since.

Since I still want to refile against Wells Fargo, I'm actually considering suing them in real court with a lawyer. There's more than one issue, they truly WILLFULLY reported incorrectly, and if it turns out that their inquiry was not authorized, well, I'll decide then ...


Detais about my DISMISSED Wells Fargo law suit.

A client just faxed me the Experian response to his inquiry dispute - "no permissible purpose:"

"Dear ....

By federal law, your personal credit report must list all that have requested your credit history. According to the Fair Credit Reporting Act, credit grantors with a permissible purpose may inquire about credit information. Requests for your credit history remain on the personal credit report for 2 years.

By federal law, your personal credit report must list all who have requested your information. According to the Fair Credit Reporting Act, businesses with a permissible purpose may review your information. Some examples are: your current creditors to monitor your accounts; other creditors who want to offer you preapproved credit; an employer who wishes to exptend an offer of employment, and a potential investor in assessing the risk of a current obligation. We report these requests only to you as a record of activities, and we do not include them on credit reports to others. They remain on your personal credit report for 2 years.

Sincerely,

Experian
NCAC"

A couple of issues:

1) Why have I read in postings that Experian DOES delete inquiries? Is this a NEW policy?

2) WHY is Experian stating that they do NOT include them on credit reports to others?

This was a fax and that last part was a little cut off, but I'm 95% sure that's what it said.

Has anyone else seen this response?

Christine,

Disputing online through an online report or CreditExpert has brought me:

22 hard deletions
4 soft deletions

My mom:

2 hard COLLECTION deletions
4 soft COLLECTION deletions

My dad:

3 hard COLLECTION deletions

They have no inquiries now. I only have 4 MBNA inquiries, which were naturally verified as I am a customer.

They have worked wonders for me, though I chose to stop applying for credit in fear this policy could soon end.

I had a deletion as late as last night.

WOW! Thanks, he probably did a snail mail dispute.

Confirmed with my client that he did a snail mail dispute. The "digital divide" is widening.

While I DO have internet access, I still can't order my Experian online since I'm in AZ.

AND, of course it takes a CREDIT CARD to order on-line.

Summary: You got credit, cash and live in the right place, you can have BETTER credit than the people who can't afford a computer, don't have credit cards or just happen to live in the wrong place.

And, started a new thread re. the Wells Fargo unauthorized inquiry - their legal department responded

That sucks... What now?

Not sure which subject you're referring to.

Re. Experian, since I'm already suing them and getting more and more pissed off at them for refusing to answer my complaint, I'm going to TRY to get a lawyer to take this to real court. Their preferred treatment of people who can dispute online will definitely be part of it.

Re. Wells Fargo, I'm going to send another settlement offer, which they won't accept, so I'll be looking for a lawyer on that matter too.

Between the inquiry AND their credit reporting incompetence, this is way bigger than Small Claims.

Wells Fargo: SETTLED for $1,000 + deletion of UNAUTHORIZED inquiry

I probably had a stronger case than most, because I was also going to sue over their total credit reporting incompetence.

I'd sure like to see many settlements like that.

And I'd like to find out about the legality of collection inquiries NOT coded as account reviews.

Also, Regis recently posted a good tactic - send your completed small claims form to show that you're ready to sue.

First send a nice fax asking what their permissible purpose was - to the legal department. Then send the 2nd fax, along with a copy of the small claims form.

Of course you can also snail mail - I just don't have the time and patience for that.