Jump to content

IvyMgmt

Early Warning

Recommended Posts

How are they allowed to report on us yet we can't put a freeze on them releasing info without our permissions? Quoted as "We are a specialty credit reporting firm, and therefore freezes are not allowed."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What did the terms and conditions that you acknowledged say when you submitted your request for a new bank account?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/4/2019 at 2:11 AM, cv91915 said:

What did the terms and conditions that you acknowledged say when you submitted your request for a new bank account?

Irrelevant.

 

But nice try.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On ‎7‎/‎3‎/‎2019 at 8:22 AM, IvyMgmt said:

How are they allowed to report on us yet we can't put a freeze on them releasing info without our permissions? Quoted as "We are a specialty credit reporting firm, and therefore freezes are not allowed."

Unfortunately the peanut gallery has only provided sarcastic comments....

 

The FCRA gives you the right to "Freeze" a CRA like Early Warning, you should inform them that they are in violation of the FCRA if they do not allow you to place a "Freeze" on your report.

 

The Early Warning website even includes your FCRA rights, you may want to direct these clowns to their own website! :lol:

https://earlywarning.com/sites/default/files/2019-04/Summary_of_rights.pdf

Edited by Rogue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have a right to place a "security freeze" on your credit report, which will prohibit a consumer reporting agency from releasing information in your credit report without your express authorization. The security freeze is designed to prevent credit, loans, and services from being approved in your name without your consent. However, you should be aware that using a security freeze to take control over who gets access to the personal and financial information in your credit report may delay, interfere with, or prohibit the timely approval of any subsequent request or application you make regarding a new loan, credit, mortgage, or any other account involving the extension of credit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Rogue said:

Unfortunately the peanut gallery has only provided sarcastic comments....

 

The FCRA gives you the right to "Freeze" a CRA like Early Warning, you should inform them that they are in violation of the FCRA if they do not allow you to place a "Freeze" on your report.

 

The Early Warning website even includes your FCRA rights, you may want to direct these clowns to their own website! :lol:

https://earlywarning.com/sites/default/files/2019-04/Summary_of_rights.pdf

Nothing sarcastic.

 

OP is either concerned about ID theft, or OP has applied for something that required his Early Warning file.  

 

The terms of the application would have included an authorization to access a wide variety of data sources.  

 

If the target financial institution wanted to pull EW and it was blocked, OP would have likely been required to unfreeze it in order for the app to be processed.  So either way, if OP's EW file was littered with negatives or EW couldn't be accessed, OP ends up with no account.  At that point OP is looking for someone besides himself to blame for the denial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, cv91915 said:

Nothing sarcastic.

 

OP is either concerned about ID theft, or OP has applied for something that required his Early Warning file.  

 

The terms of the application would have included an authorization to access a wide variety of data sources.  

 

If the target financial institution wanted to pull EW and it was blocked, OP would have likely been required to unfreeze it in order for the app to be processed.  So either way, if OP's EW file was littered with negatives or EW couldn't be accessed, OP ends up with no account.  At that point OP is looking for someone besides himself to blame for the denial.

 

Obviously your ESP skills aren't as good as your merchandise thieving skills.

 

Even if Ivy were applying for an account, it is very common for people to freeze a bureau or two in order to "guide" a creditor into pulling a more favorable report.  

 

The question as it stands, without your shiddy ESP skills, is of value.  If EW says they cannot be frozen, why is that possible?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Rogue said:

Unfortunately the peanut gallery has only provided sarcastic comments....

 

The FCRA gives you the right to "Freeze" a CRA like Early Warning, you should inform them that they are in violation of the FCRA if they do not allow you to place a "Freeze" on your report.

 

The Early Warning website even includes your FCRA rights, you may want to direct these clowns to their own website! :lol:

https://earlywarning.com/sites/default/files/2019-04/Summary_of_rights.pdf

 

So how about they sent me a letter telling me this:

 

Quote

This will respond to your question regarding a security freeze.

The Fair Credit Reporting Act exempts consumer reporting agencies identified by Section 603(x) from the requirement of accepting or referring freeze information to other consumer reporting agencies such as TransUnion, Experian, or Equifax. Early Warning is a specialty consumer reporting agency as defined in the section.

Should you have any questions, please contact us at 800.745.1560.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure if anyone has ever pulled their Early Warning file but even if you do not have anything negative there there are banks that report every single transaction you make, the amount of that transaction, and your balances. No one has the right to pull that information without my permission.. I can have a million dollars there or $5.00 and I don't even see how this is remotely right.. Like why does anyone need to see that amount if information even if you are applying for credit or a home.. If you ask for a statement I provide it.. This is just too much access ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/3/2019 at 11:27 AM, hegemony said:

sorry to learn about your ID theft.

I don't recall saying that...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

41 minutes ago, IvyMgmt said:

This will respond to your question regarding a security freeze.

The Fair Credit Reporting Act exempts consumer reporting agencies identified by Section 603(x) from the requirement of accepting or referring freeze information to other consumer reporting agencies such as TransUnion, Experian, or Equifax. Early Warning is a specialty consumer reporting agency as defined in the section.

Should you have any questions, please contact us at 800.745.1560.

 

Well, the FCRA does state that the National Security Freeze only applies to credit reporting agencies referred to in:

 

603 (p)  The term “consumer reporting agency that compiles and maintains files on consumers on a nationwide basis” means a consumer reporting agency that regularly engages in the practice of assembling or evaluating, and maintaining, for the purpose of furnishing consumer reports to third parties bearing on a consumer’s credit worthiness, credit standing, or credit capacity, each of the following regarding consumers residing nationwide:

  • (1)  Public record information.
  • (2)  Credit account information from persons who furnish that information regularly and in the ordinary course of business.
  •  

Do creditors pull EWS?  

 

As for your comment, below, I agree.  That is too much data to be made available to anybody who pays for it.  

 

43 minutes ago, IvyMgmt said:

I am not sure if anyone has ever pulled their Early Warning file but even if you do not have anything negative there there are banks that report every single transaction you make, the amount of that transaction, and your balances. No one has the right to pull that information without my permission.. I can have a million dollars there or $5.00 and I don't even see how this is remotely right.. Like why does anyone need to see that amount if information even if you are applying for credit or a home.. If you ask for a statement I provide it.. This is just too much access ...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, IvyMgmt said:

I am not sure if anyone has ever pulled their Early Warning file but even if you do not have anything negative there there are banks that report every single transaction you make, the amount of that transaction, and your balances. No one has the right to pull that information without my permission.. I can have a million dollars there or $5.00 and I don't even see how this is remotely right.. Like why does anyone need to see that amount if information even if you are applying for credit or a home.. If you ask for a statement I provide it.. This is just too much access ...

Read your account agreements.  If you don't accept the terms, close the account.

 

This is what our Bank of America checking account agreement says:

 

Disclosing Information About You and Your Account

This section applies to both business and personal accounts. We may disclose information about your accounts to consumer reporting agencies and to other persons or agencies who, in our judgment, have a legitimate purpose for obtaining information.

For example, subject to any applicable financial privacy laws or other laws or regulations, we may provide information on you and your accounts:

• to consumer reporting agencies, such as Early Warning Services, LLC;

 to anyone who we reasonably believe is conducting a legitimate credit inquiry, including inquiries to verify the existence or condition of an account for a third party such as a lender, merchant or consumer reporting agency;

 in response to any subpoena, summons, court or administrative order, or other legal process which we believe requires our compliance;

 in connection with collection of indebtedness or to report losses incurred by us;
 in compliance with any agreement between us and a professional, regulatory or disciplinary

body;

 in connection with potential sales of businesses;

 to service providers who help us meet your needs by assisting us in providing or offering our products or services; and

 to other third parties as is described in our publication U.S. Consumer Privacy Notice or as required under applicable law or regulation.

For personal accounts, the terms of our U.S. Consumer Privacy Notice governs in the event of a conflict between the terms of this section and the terms of our U.S. Consumer Privacy Notice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, cv91915 said:

Read your account agreements.  If you don't accept the terms, close the account.

 

This is what our Bank of America checking account agreement says:

 

Disclosing Information About You and Your Account

This section applies to both business and personal accounts. We may disclose information about your accounts to consumer reporting agencies and to other persons or agencies who, in our judgment, have a legitimate purpose for obtaining information.

For example, subject to any applicable financial privacy laws or other laws or regulations, we may provide information on you and your accounts:

• to consumer reporting agencies, such as Early Warning Services, LLC;

 to anyone who we reasonably believe is conducting a legitimate credit inquiry, including inquiries to verify the existence or condition of an account for a third party such as a lender, merchant or consumer reporting agency;

 in response to any subpoena, summons, court or administrative order, or other legal process which we believe requires our compliance;

 in connection with collection of indebtedness or to report losses incurred by us;
 in compliance with any agreement between us and a professional, regulatory or disciplinary

body;

 in connection with potential sales of businesses;

 to service providers who help us meet your needs by assisting us in providing or offering our products or services; and

 to other third parties as is described in our publication U.S. Consumer Privacy Notice or as required under applicable law or regulation.

For personal accounts, the terms of our U.S. Consumer Privacy Notice governs in the event of a conflict between the terms of this section and the terms of our U.S. Consumer Privacy Notice.

 

Jethro, does it hurt when you think?  Just how freaking r ... -- Oooops, can't use that word -- can you be?  Stick to something you have reasonable chance of success at like stealing shit from your neighbors.  

 

The issue isn't the agreement.  Any two-bit, trigger-pumping moron knows that when you apply for credit you agree to a ton of the same crap, yet we still have the option of a security freeze if we so desire.  

 

The issue, Jethro, isn't the Terms & Conditions.  The issue is why can't EW be frozen much the same way we can freeze LexisNexis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, PotO said:

 

Jethro, does it hurt when you think?  Just how freaking r ... -- Oooops, can't use that word -- can you be?  Stick to something you have reasonable chance of success at like stealing shit from your neighbors.  

 

The issue isn't the agreement.  Any two-bit, trigger-pumping moron knows that when you apply for credit you agree to a ton of the same crap, yet we still have the option of a security freeze if we so desire.  

 

The issue, Jethro, isn't the Terms & Conditions.  The issue is why can't EW be frozen much the same way we can freeze LexisNexis.

 

This would be correct.. "The issue is why can't EW be frozen much the same way we can freeze LexisNexis."

 

Speaking of LN what a torn in the damn side! They collect all this old ass data, addresses, peoples names who lived at your address and add them to your file.. then when you say no to the damn security questions they say you are lying.. They are really awful when going for security clearances.. ugh!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IvyMgmt said:

I am not sure if anyone has ever pulled their Early Warning file but even if you do not have anything negative there there are banks that report every single transaction you make, the amount of that transaction,

On 7/3/2019 at 11:11 AM, cv91915 said:

What did the terms and conditions that you acknowledged say when you submitted your request for a new bank account?

and your balances. No one has the right to pull that information without my permission.. I can have a million dollars there or $5.00 and I don't even see how this is remotely right.. Like why does anyone need to see that amount if information even if you are applying for credit or a home.. If you ask for a statement I provide it.. This is just too much access ...

 

53 minutes ago, cv91915 said:

Read your account agreements.  If you don't accept the terms, close the account.

 

This is what our Bank of America checking account agreement says:

 

Disclosing Information About You and Your Account

This section applies to both business and personal accounts. We may disclose information about your accounts to consumer reporting agencies and to other persons or agencies who, in our judgment, have a legitimate purpose for obtaining information.

For example, subject to any applicable financial privacy laws or other laws or regulations, we may provide information on you and your accounts:

• to consumer reporting agencies, such as Early Warning Services, LLC;

 to anyone who we reasonably believe is conducting a legitimate credit inquiry, including inquiries to verify the existence or condition of an account for a third party such as a lender, merchant or consumer reporting agency;

 in response to any subpoena, summons, court or administrative order, or other legal process which we believe requires our compliance;

 in connection with collection of indebtedness or to report losses incurred by us;
 in compliance with any agreement between us and a professional, regulatory or disciplinary

body;

 in connection with potential sales of businesses;

 to service providers who help us meet your needs by assisting us in providing or offering our products or services; and

 to other third parties as is described in our publication U.S. Consumer Privacy Notice or as required under applicable law or regulation.

For personal accounts, the terms of our U.S. Consumer Privacy Notice governs in the event of a conflict between the terms of this section and the terms of our U.S. Consumer Privacy Notice.

 

28 minutes ago, IvyMgmt said:

 

This would be correct.. "The issue is why can't EW be frozen much the same way we can freeze LexisNexis."

 

Speaking of LN what a torn in the damn side! They collect all this old ass data, addresses, peoples names who lived at your address and add them to your file.. then when you say no to the damn security questions they say you are lying.. They are really awful when going for security clearances.. ugh!

I have addressed why the data can be reported and why it can be pulled.

 

No one has provided any facts to refute EWS' assertion that they are exempt from the freeze requirement because EWS' interpretation of 603(x) is incorrect, or for some other logical reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, IvyMgmt said:

 

This would be correct.. "The issue is why can't EW be frozen much the same way we can freeze LexisNexis."

 

Speaking of LN what a torn in the damn side! They collect all this old ass data, addresses, peoples names who lived at your address and add them to your file.. then when you say no to the damn security questions they say you are lying.. They are really awful when going for security clearances.. ugh!

 

Yeah, they can be a pain the the neck.  Not only do they come up with addresses from decades ago, but then the ones you mentioned.  The house we have now was newly built when we moved in, but owned by a real estate developer, Sahara Development, who owned the entire estate before putting the homes on the market.  

 

So, I get this ID question all the time, "Which of the following individuals are also associated with 123 Main Street?"

 

1.  Mary Smith

2.  Bob Jones

3.  Charles Adams

4.  Sahara Reit

5.  None of the above 

 

The correct answer is 5.  But LN, in their stupidity, says 4.

 

Sahara Real Estate Investment Trust.  

 

I think next month when I'm home on leave I need to research how to dispute stuff in my LN file.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, PotO said:

 

Yeah, they can be a pain the the neck.  Not only do they come up with addresses from decades ago, but then the ones you mentioned.  The house we have now was newly built when we moved in, but owned by a real estate developer, Sahara Development, who owned the entire estate before putting the homes on the market.  

 

So, I get this ID question all the time, "Which of the following individuals are also associated with 123 Main Street?"

 

1.  Mary Smith

2.  Bob Jones

3.  Charles Adams

4.  Sahara Reit

5.  None of the above 

 

The correct answer is 5.  But LN, in their stupidity, says 4.

 

Sahara Real Estate Investment Trust.  

 

I think next month when I'm home on leave I need to research how to dispute stuff in my LN file.  

 

I can help with that.. You call them and order your whole entire file.. you want it all from your driving record, insurance records, addresses, email address, phone numbers all.. You may get 300 pages of stuff some of which maybe repeat info.. I had 4 different social variations on my report *hard eye roll* once you get it go through it and then call them back and dispute it all over the phone.. I have had a lot deleted last year then the mess began all over again!

 

I told  friend I see now this will need to be a yearly action.. 

 

Once I did it last year a lot of those weird questions stopped coming up.. I then went through all the little other reporting agencies ordered all of their reports and did the same exact disputing.. So you have to go down many levels for this nonsense.. they had email addresses well over 20 years old on my report! and they had a home address since I was born!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, PotO said:

 

Yeah, they can be a pain the the neck.  Not only do they come up with addresses from decades ago, but then the ones you mentioned.  The house we have now was newly built when we moved in, but owned by a real estate developer, Sahara Development, who owned the entire estate before putting the homes on the market.  

 

So, I get this ID question all the time, "Which of the following individuals are also associated with 123 Main Street?"

 

1.  Mary Smith

2.  Bob Jones

3.  Charles Adams

4.  Sahara Reit

5.  None of the above 

 

The correct answer is 5.  But LN, in their stupidity, says 4.

 

Sahara Real Estate Investment Trust.  

 

I think next month when I'm home on leave I need to research how to dispute stuff in my LN file.  

Given that we have a SCotUS holding that corporations can be in-duh-viduals, if item #4 is associated with your address, then the answer is not in incorrect option...

 

Freezes were not codified to aid in manipulating the process.  They were originally intended to assist those of us who were actually victims of identity theft.  The abuses of such processes serve only to harm actual victims. 

 

CV properly notes that the reporting of data is spelled out in customer agreements...it is not the fault of the institutions involved if the consumer failed to heed those provisions of the Agreement.  There are plenty of banks and other financial institutions out there.  If one believes that too much data is being shared, then you close the account and look elsewhere.  This is no different than my practice for personal banking of ditching a bank when they hit a double digit number of branches or open a location outside the Great State of Texas. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, centex said:

Given that we have a SCotUS holding that corporations can be in-duh-viduals, if item #4 is associated with your address, then the answer is not in incorrect option...

 

Freezes were not codified to aid in manipulating the process.  They were originally intended to assist those of us who were actually victims of identity theft.  The abuses of such processes serve only to harm actual victims. 

 

CV properly notes that the reporting of data is spelled out in customer agreements...it is not the fault of the institutions involved if the consumer failed to heed those provisions of the Agreement.  There are plenty of banks and other financial institutions out there.  If one believes that too much data is being shared, then you close the account and look elsewhere.  This is no different than my practice for personal banking of ditching a bank when they hit a double digit number of branches or open a location outside the Great State of Texas. 

 

No, Einstein, #4 is not correct.  Years down the road the 27th owner, much less renter, of the property isn't going to figure that in a list of four people the apparent last name of Reit actually means Real Estate Investment Trust.  And exactly which average consumer answering LN questions even realizes, much less gives a fook, about a Supreme Court decision.  Muster up a bit of common sense, will you?  

 

You also missed the boat on the total function of a freeze.  It is also designed to prevent identity theft.  There's then the pesky little issue of many inventions designed for a certain purpose that have been morphed into other uses.  As long as it's not abuse -- and none but the weak-minded would think that it is -- anybody can use a freeze to steer a potential creditor towards a different CRA or, in the case of Capital One, to limit the number of INQs without worrying about an arrest warrant.  Your idea that this somehow harms actual identity theft victims is beyond stupid.  

 

You and Jethro need to re-sit third grade reading.  Ivy's question is why can't we freeze EWS / specialty credit reporting agencies.  It's a valid question and I'm sure others may have the same question now or newbies can have that question in the future.  It's a topic worthy of discussion.  To come up with the hare-brained response "Well, you agreed to it.  Read the ToS" is irrelevant to the question.  

 

What is relevant is what Rogue pointed out.  What is relevant is the FCRA.  What is relevant is data which can prove / disprove EWS actually provides data for credit-related purposes or that creditors use their data for credit-related purposes.  If your intellectual ability is only limited to "Well, if you don't like it change banks", then maybe you need to seek topics with fewer moving parts.

 

 

Edited by PotO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know very well what REIT stands for...I make quite a bit of money through them. 

 

When people are stupid enough to associate their business venture with a residence, then it is going to screw questions up for years on end.  I don't care whether people are aware of what the Supremes have previously ruled...what DOES matter is that a corporation can indeed BE an individual.  Thus the question and associated response is not incorrect. 

 

Trying to get a lender to use a different bureau IS an abuse of the process.  Personally, i would rather a lender simply say that a frozen bureau will either be unfrozen or they won't consider the application.  They have an inherent right to see all data relevant to the decision-making process.  Those that have to manipulate the process are often the ones who will be returning here in a few years posting about having, again, gotten in the hole and wanting to know if what worked X years ago is still going to be the process du jour.   

 

Beyond that, I will leave the rest of your ad hominem attacks for mods to deal with if they so choose. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, centex said:

I know very well what REIT stands for...I make quite a bit of money through them. 

 

When people are stupid enough to associate their business venture with a residence, then it is going to screw questions up for years on end.  I don't care whether people are aware of what the Supremes have previously ruled...what DOES matter is that a corporation can indeed BE an individual.  Thus the question and associated response is not incorrect. 

 

Trying to get a lender to use a different bureau IS an abuse of the process.  Personally, i would rather a lender simply say that a frozen bureau will either be unfrozen or they won't consider the application.  They have an inherent right to see all data relevant to the decision-making process.  Those that have to manipulate the process are often the ones who will be returning here in a few years posting about having, again, gotten in the hole and wanting to know if what worked X years ago is still going to be the process du jour.   

 

Beyond that, I will leave the rest of your ad hominem attacks for mods to deal with if they so choose. 

 

I seriously doubt you make much money.  Only smart lawyers make big bucks.  You are probably on food stamps.  

 

Einstein, learn to read.  People have no idea, much less say in the matter, when the developer set things up that way before they started selling their properties.  And your answer is not just stupid, it's beyond stupid.  It's like someone asking the question, "What time is lunch?" and you respond with drivel about how the Romans invented watches because sundials were too big to put in your pocket.  

 

Abuse of the process?  Are you really trying to win the Moron of the Year prize?  CB is all about abuse of process.  $2 Trick, Installment Loan Hack, *D, *B and many more.  You must not exit your cave very often. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, this I was know for sure. I did not give Wells Fargo this morning a Early Warning in regards to the rancid deviled egg bomb I dropped in their branch this morning. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, TheVig said:

Well, this I was know for sure. I did not give Wells Fargo this morning a Early Warning in regards to the rancid deviled egg bomb I dropped in their branch this morning. 

 

With all the deep poop they've been in recently, your gift was probably pretty refreshing for them.  😄

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Today's Birthdays

    No users celebrating today.
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      176,873
    • Most Online
      1,528

    Newest Member
    wandasoto
    Joined

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

Guidelines