Jump to content

Please consider disabling your adblocker for CreditBoards if you have not already done so.  This site depends on advertising revenue to stay online.


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Location
  1. When I pay down an account, I dispute the balance with the CRA's as soon as I know my new balance.
  2. Is the old stuff on your credit report? You can dispute anything on your credit report, regardless of how old it is.
  3. You already have EQ on one FCRA violation. They are required to re-investigate for 15 days per your request following new information you provide. Send them an ITS letter. Then, DV the CA CMRRR. If they can't verify the debt, they can't report it. Either A)the info will be deleted, B)the CA will verify, or C)EQ will be stubborn. If B happens, send the CA an ITS letter. If C) happens, take EQ to court.
  4. Having worked finance and insurance in the auto industry, I believe exactly what you are saying they told you.
  5. A great place to start for debt validation. It gives step by step instructions: http://www.creditinfocenter.com/rebuild/de...alidation.shtml Credit Repair 101: http://www.debt-consolidation-credit-repai...topic.php?t=100 More on Credit Repair: http://www.creditinfocenter.com/rebuild/ Plus all the posts on this board. Good luck!
  6. Wait -- they pulled a hard inq, right? Which means if there's no debt, there's no PP. Send them another letter saying they had no PP in pulling your credit. Give them 7 days to delete the inquiry or be prepared to be sued $1,000 per report for violating the FCRA and $1,000 for violating the FDCPA for collection activity.
  7. If he paid $200 a couple of days ago, that $75 balance won't be reported right away. When it gets reported depends on when Discover does its monthly updates. If Discover is the only credit he got out of 3 inquiries, that definitely sends up a red flag. When was his first-ever credit account opened? What is the credit limit on the BofA gold card?
  8. 3 in 5 months is considered alot, especially if no new tradelines appear as a result. According to FICO, it shows creditors that he may be in financial trouble and is trying to get credit to solve it. What is the utilization% on his Discover card? It shouldn't be higher than 30% of the total available credit.
  9. If you went to a mortgage broker, they pull a tri-merge to sell to a lender, and then the lender pulls another tri-merge in underwriting. If you went straight to a lender, sometimes they will pull twice.
  10. Just don't jump the gun and give the lender any information until he asks for it. The lender may want you to word things a certain way or request other types of information. The waiting sucks, but when a loan is in underwriting, your attempts to "fix" things may make it worse.
  11. First thing: Don't panic. FHA loans have more flexible qualifications, and they will bend over backwards to get you approved. What will most likely end up happening is your lender will ask you to pay the CA account again and write what's called a "sniffle letter" that explains all the negative information on your report, and your promise to pay your mortgage on time each month. The information you described is not because you're making late payments on previously OK accounts, which would most likely kill your loan. There's conflicting info, so they will definitely ask you to explain it. If you're closing on 6/4, your credit will most likely be pulled about a week before. They will gather the docs for you to sign, and they need to determine your interest rate.
  12. I should have added a disclaimer to my statement. I only speak for myself. Every successful PFD I negotiated, I didn't offer to pay more than I owed. But, if the delete is more important than the pay, more power to you. Two things about that. If they wanted to "ensure accurate reporting," then EVERY transaction consumers enter into should be added to the report. Selective reporting in no way accurately reflects a consumer's credit history. CRA's can't get sh*t straight on reports as it is. So, they're in control of the process and they still can't "ensure accurate reporting." If the reporting were truly accurate, there would be no need for a dispute process nor a consumer statement provision. The lost revenue argument was also used by tobacco companies to justify lying to congress about their knowledge of smoking risks, and later when settling various terms of class-action lawsuits. See Phillip Morris' Valueline Report to see how bad they're hurting. IMHO, it would be a good day to see CRA's go out of business. They are about as evil a profession as public relations and marketing.
  13. Try asking them how much extra they would want for a delete. Forget all of that. Negative information can be reported up to 7 years and BKs up to 10 years. There's no law preventing the deletion of any type of information from a credit report. If my positive utility bills, magazine subscriptions, cell phone bills, cashed checks, paid medical bills, and pizza delivery payments don't appear on my credit reports, why should they appear when negative? There is also no law requiring a company to maintain credit reports; if there were, the government would be doing it. Make no mistake -- credit reporting is a for-profit enterprise, and its for the benefit of financial services.
  14. Just my $.02 -- Number one -- when creditors stop changing credit agreement terms mid-stream, then I will harp on moral responsibilities to folks who change their minds mid-stream and default on a loan. When creditors stop selling people's names to other creditors for profit, I'll tell a consumer to not eat and pay his bill. I'll bet my right arm that the majority of creditors change terms mid-stream to increase profits, and the majority of debtors change their minds mid-stream to buy groceries and pay rent. You say two wrongs don't make a right? I counter with one good turn deserves another. Number two -- consumers would, are, and always will be paying higher fees, interest, etc even IF there was a 0% rate of default, CO's and BK's. Creditors are all about profit, and there are plenty of other reasons for them to justify raising fees, interes, etc. Number three -- A creditor is only a victim in their own eyes. that's why there are creditor protection laws, not consumer protection laws. Creditors gain a tax write-off on a charge off. They sell it to CA's for pennies on the dollar to fund their in-house recovery efforts. Then, they pass the "costs" which have already been recouped to the consumer? Victims have had something taken away? How can a creditor claim to have something taken away when they've already made a profit on it?

About Us

Since 2003, creditboards.com has helped thousands of people repair their credit, force abusive collection agents to follow the law, ensure proper reporting by credit reporting agencies, and provided financial education to help avoid the pitfalls that can lead to negative tradelines.
  • Create New...

Important Information