should I just go hire an attorney?

[artists4animals]

I just repulled my credit ....all the IIBs again are not included

so we will not get our mortgage I am quite sure.... :cry:

 

since the CRAs do verify the Bk...which all disputed accounts are on the schedule F...(If they verified the BK would they not also have to verify the TLs IIB?) they have verified that none are IIB! WRONG!!!

 

they are in violation with reinsertion, inaccurate history, dafamation???

 

I am waiting on the final response from them via snail mail...but via phone and online checks show that nothing has changed as a matter a fact they took away a IIB without notice to me...(reinsertion?)

 

should I just start shopping for a attorney and attempt to go for damages???

our interest rate would be way out of reach.....

 

they also state these were verified with the creditors... what can I nail them with? I have the BK notice, schedule and discharge right in front of me....also some accounts were reaged to 2-2003 by the creditor...

 

Is it worth it to atually hire an attorney and go for the big enchilada?

When this is done what are the usual settlements...or should I just keep fighting myself?

 

My Experian is cleared....do they (CRAs)verify with eachother or share info?

 

and in these cases will they (CRAs, OCs) have to pay for the attorney fees if I win?

 

how many disputes do I have to file and time must I give them before I do sue?

 

asking this so I do not waste $$$ with an attorney that just wants a $550 fee just to tell me NO GO.

 

overwhemed, sad, beaten down.....and really ticked.

 

artists

[LKH]

Which cra is it? TU?

[artists4animals]

TU has done the most damage....6 IIB read with balances..totaling over $17,000 now...they took off another IIB.

 

EQ has 4 not IIBed...

 

and I have 2 inquiries that are not PP on TU supposedly they stated they were taking them off....they have not..

 

I just sent them proof of a paid never late...

guessing they will probably delete that positive account...LOL!

(sarcasm)

 

I have not sent them the BK papers...and since they verified the BK on their own...(I did not dispute this item) they must be able to easily verify the TLs that are included....which are all on sch F and discharged...

 

Is TU famous for this??

[dixiedrifter]

As I see it you have two options...

 

The fastest way to clear your files is to send TU your schedule F. If TU still verifies you have a hell of a lawsuit.

 

*WARNING* By sending your BK papers to a CRA YOU WILL SELF VERIFY THE BK, AND EACH OF THE TL ON YOUR REPORT. You can pretty much hang up getting them removed via disputes.

 

The other option is to send a modified version of my CYA MANIPULATION LETTER to each of the creditors whom you disputed. The creditors can either give you what you want, or they can go to court.

 

You might want to include in it, "I have already been denied a mortgage due to the verification that the account was not included in BK and have suffered actual damages in the 6 digit range. If your company verified this account incorrectly, I will accept immediate and complete deletion of the account from my credit files in lieu of the actual damages I have suffered. Upon my reciept of written confirmation that the account will be deleted, I will consider the matter to be closed and hold your company harmless."

[artists4animals]

where is the CYA letter??

 

sorry I searched and cant seem to find....

 

I am so brain dead at this point...

 

dont know rather to laugh or cry....

 

and how long did it take for a response from your creditors?

or to get them to remove derogatory info??

 

If I can get this done in 10 days I still may have a chance at the mort.

 

thanks so very much!

[crofttk]

...The fastest way to clear your files is to send TU your schedule F. If TU still verifies you have a hell of a lawsuit.  

 

*WARNING* By sending your BK papers to a CRA YOU WILL SELF VERIFY THE BK, AND EACH OF THE TL ON YOUR REPORT. You can pretty much hang up getting them removed via disputes.

...

 

Might as well save your breath there dixiedrifter. OP has already named the above as the worst advice they ever got on this board, even though this was not actually recommended and, of course, the advantage of this in a "time crunch" situation was already pointed out to them !

[dixiedrifter]

Well if the BK paperwork to the CRA is out of the question, you can pretty much hang up on getting your mortgage if all you have is 10 days.

 

You'd do much better to wait 6 months and clean your reports up as possible then try again.

 

Do a search for guerilla tactic for stuck accounts

[juliedealer]

I guess if I were in your shoes I'd go directly for damage$. I was reading on the FCRA site( I know that isn't the proper name) that generally an attorney will take these kinds of cases on contingency. The damage has been done from what you say, go for the jugular.

[humblemarc]

I guess if I were in your shoes I'd go directly for damage$.  I was reading on the FCRA site( I know that isn't the proper name) that generally an attorney will take these kinds of  cases on contingency.  The damage has been done from what you say, go for the jugular.

 

Ditto

 

see www.naca.net

[LKH]

I guess if I were in your shoes I'd go directly for damage$.  I was reading on the FCRA site( I know that isn't the proper name) that generally an attorney will take these kinds of  cases on contingency.  The damage has been done from what you say, go for the jugular.

 

Ditto

 

see www.naca.net

 

I would agree, if time was not an issue. But, since it is, Mr. Humble, don't you think she could contact someone at these cra's for rapid assistance? And, if that doesn't work, then go for the jugalar, because, at that point, time will no longer be an issue.

[artists4animals]

that is my line of thought.....sue for damages

 

they say they verified the TLS as not IIB....they are on schedule F on my desk with full discharge....Experian cleared this in a matter of days...

 

I am afraid that if I send in the Bk papers it will not just ruin my chance of dispute but also just keep this thing going and going...

 

they verified the BK....so if they verified the BK....I did not ask them to verify or nor did I dispute it....how could they not verify the TLs included...

experian did ....

 

So I am trying to figure out this much...if i did send in the Bk papers and finally after another 30 days they clear it...i will still be stuck paying higher interest most likely as the rates probably will climb....they have 30 days....rates sure can climb in 30 days....

 

If I sit on the Bk papers and attempt to sue..the rates will still go up but is there a chance I could win enough in damages to over ride this...

geeze we only need a mortgage of $98,000.

 

Experian Fico with still on derogatory is now 685....I have proof sent to them to clear that as well...already sent it in....

 

TU is 608

 

EQ is 597.....

 

all because they show this as balances still due....and not IIB.

lender must stick to fico scores to approve interest rate we can afford.

 

so does anyone have a clue how much I could recover in damages?

a ball park.....??

 

the difference in interest I would have to pay with these poor scores on this loan is $26,000.....plus they reaged an account OCs did ...

 

can I go after the OCs and the CRAs and how much $ in damages??...

 

at this point they can just buy the house for me cash outright

[humblemarc]

I guess if I were in your shoes I'd go directly for damage$.  I was reading on the FCRA site( I know that isn't the proper name) that generally an attorney will take these kinds of  cases on contingency.  The damage has been done from what you say, go for the jugular.

 

Ditto

 

see www.naca.net

 

I would agree, if time was not an issue. But, since it is, Mr. Humble, don't you think she could contact someone at these cra's for rapid assistance? And, if that doesn't work, then go for the jugalar, because, at that point, time will no longer be an issue.

 

:wink:

iiii gggueesss they could do that. But i'm hesitant to give advice on this subject. Ten days is very tight indeed.

 

artist-- if you decide to follow LKH's advice, make sure you have your broker/loan officer send/fax the needed documents with a letter from them stating the inability to close on the mortgage if the tradelines are not updated/deleted immediately. Again realize that by doing this, it will also be extremely hard to have these tradelines deleted at a later point.

[juliedealer]

concerning the attorney you might try this

http://forum.freeadvice.com/forumdisplay.php?forumid=2

 

on the top of page click on "find a lawyer", they locate lawyers in your local that will give a FREE consultation.

[humblemarc]

concerning the attorney you might try this

http://forum.freeadvice.com/forumdisplay.php?forumid=2

 

on the top of page click on "find a lawyer", they locate lawyers in your local that will give a FREE consultation.

 

personally i would stick with a www.naca.net lawyer. Most lawyers don't know jack squat in regards to the FCRA and consumer laws. Stick to the one's who do it for a living.

[juliedealer]

In the past I had an attorney for a boyfriend, I had a problem with an insurance company, they had promised to pay for a particular service and I had it in writing before I had the procedure done, well as you can guess, I had the procedure done and the ins didn't pay. At some point I was about to be sued by the hospital for payment... Atty's advice ? LET THEM SUE it will show actual damages and I'd get a hell of alot more in the law suit against the ins company. Long story short after 1 year of atty corresponding with ins co he faxes my court summons the day before my court date, guess what the ins company did? WIRED the money directly the hospital that day.

 

 

What I'm trying to say, is if you get turned down you can show actual harm has been done, not theoretical harm.

[juliedealer]

thanks humble marc for that link.

[artists4animals]

thank you all very very much!!!

 

some day I will sleep again....

 

I was able to find 3 lawyers in my area....I am going to give one last shot at the CRAs and chat with lawyers first....

 

Monday I hope to have hope!

 

thank you all!

 

wondering why I feel guilty at the prospect of suing ....

 

I suppose I should get the lender to send me copies of my CR and identify what exactly is ruining my chances at a reasonable interest rate...also

wondering if you can sue for pain and suffering....like 8 weeks of insomnia and a serious case of the hives.....LOL...sad but true

:roll:

I may need psychiatric care soon.... :shock:

LMAO! no really this is making me nuts and I am missing time at work to solve it ...

 

thanks again all.....

 

Its so good to know I am not the only tortured soul in the hands of CRAs.

[artists4animals]

Julie we already were turned down by one lender.....because of this mess....that is was opened my eyes to the problem..so I guess we are past 1 count of damages done now we are at 2!????

 

I let the first on slide because I figured it was an easy mistake to clear....

duh duh duh dumb me!

 

then just reapply with the shiny new Fico scores...

 

apparently NOT!

 

so damage is done....its been over 2yrs and 3 months since the BK discharge.

I think that is plenty of time for them to update....(personal opinion)

 

so if what you are saying is that I have proof I have already been damaged? I pretty much have them by the kahunas?

[SassyinAz]

Don't let the furnishers off the hook please, they are the ones screwing with you firstly and responsible for the information.

 

Sassy

[artists4animals]

thanks for the reminder sassy!

 

I am so caught up with my eye on the golden ring ( getting the mort) that I forgot I got them by the balls too huh!

 

amazing.....my TU FICO says that if I just paid down the debt showing on the report I would have a score of 708.....the debt showing is all IIB. should be zero balances...this is just crazy!

 

thinking I should take them on one at a time (OCs) so the whole thing does not get lumped together ....and I can get more damages

 

a4a

[keb]

I'm betting that I'll get my neck chopped off for this, but I'll say it anyway:

 

Think about this:

 

If the CRAs had a copy of your BK filing, with Schedule F included, sitting in front of them, do you think it would hurt for you to send them a copy? No, it wouldn't make the slightest bit of difference, they'd already have it. And would it even be possible to do "not mines" and actually get the stuff off? Hardly, they'd have the proof sitting on their desk. The CRAs don't have the Schedule F.

 

They verify the BK by contacting the court of record and asking "did person X with SSN Y residing at address Z file BK on such-and-such a date?", to which the answer is "yes", hence it's verified. Or, more accurately in today's world, they go online and type the request in and get an answer. They don't pull down your entire set of paperwork. People here may claim that it should be otherwise, but I'd bet that the vast majority of courts in this country would say that they've done all that they're required to do.

 

They verify the accounts by asking a putatively "responsible" business entity whether or not the information they were reporting regarding you is true. If those "responsible" entities say "yes", it's validated. If you want to prove to the CRAs that it's false, send them a Schedule F. Otherwise it's just your word (the word of an apparently irresponsible debtor) against the word of a company who is required by law to tell the truth. If you were a CRA, who would you believe, particularly since you are unwilling to send them documentation to prove your point?

 

The CRAs are just a newspaper. They report what they're told. If you have a problem with the information that they're reporting, you need to work it out with the people who are TELLING the CRAs the wrong stuff. You should be mad at the LENDERS. THEY'RE the ones who are dicking with you.

 

You can try to sue the CRA, but I bet you don't get far with it, unless they failed to investigate at all, or they reinserted in violation of the law, or they have in fact been told the correct way to report a tradeline and fail to do so. In any case, be prepared to wait a long time for resolution. It won't happen in 10 days.

 

This is the unstated downside of not sending the CRAs the Schedule F. You have to live with all of the incorrectly reported crap until you do all the work to fix it from the lender side. If you want to reserve for yourself the potential ability to dispute a perfectly factual BK listing from your CR well before its time is up, you have to live with the fact that in the short run, you won't get a house, because you haven't done the rest of the work yet. Your choice.

 

I'm not really this dogmatic, but I do think that people blame the CRAs far more than is their due. This is your lenders' fault.

[crofttk]

Keb, I'm impressed.

Did you read my mind ?

:shock: No?

:cry:

 

Damn good answer anyways !

 

I know my Pacer listing has no Schedule F in it !

 

It seems like a compromise approach in expediency, if one RULES OUT sending Sched. F to CRAs, would be to supply Sched. F to the offending OC's to get them to resolve it quickly. Of course you still run the risk of an account disputed with Sched. F being "sticky" after that, but that's with the OC, maybe the lesser of 2 evils, thus a compromise.

 

Of course, none of that applies if you've decided to forget the nortgage, document the damages and sue the bejeezus out of them.

[humblemarc]

I say sue em all!

 

Doesn't matter . .. .

neither CRAs nor OCs do their job properly. And i won't tell you the numerous stories of how these companies negligence both willful and not, have seriously impacted completely innocent and not-so-completely innocent people's life, because these companies refuse to do their jobs. And since most people (contrary to what is reflected on this board) do absolutely NOTHING to hold the CRAs and OCs responsible, it continues on and on. (which is why most of the people are on the board now)

 

I say sue em all! and watch how they blame each other in court and eventually settle out of court to leave the last company fighting to take the big damages.

[crofttk]

FWIW, humblemarc, now that I know these things, I may have a show for you guys (and Christine !) if we get screwed on a vehicle purchase financing we'll apply for late summer/early fall. I promise ! :twisted:

[SassyinAz]

keb: I'm betting that I'll get my neck chopped off for this, but I'll say it anyway:

 

Think about this:

 

If the CRAs had a copy of your BK filing, with Schedule F included, sitting in front of them, do you think it would hurt for you to send them a copy? No, it wouldn't make the slightest bit of difference, they'd already have it. And would it even be possible to do "not mines" and actually get the stuff off? Hardly, they'd have the proof sitting on their desk. The CRAs don't have the Schedule F.

 

Yes, it would make a HUGE difference. Whether they have a copy or not is not relevant. The big 3's are NOT information furnishers, they report what is furnished TO them and the courts do not.

 

Further, should you dispute that information they are REQUIRED to go beyond even the original source.

 

That is NOT proof. You have the absolute right under section 623 of the FCRA to DISPUTE the information furnished directly with the information furnisher.

 

IF what you are suggesting were true, you would not have that right nor would it need to be included in the FCRA, which is where your private cause of action against a furnisher of information comes from.

 

And too, you are skipping the verifiable requirement. Negative accurate information can and must be removed if it cannot be verified. Verifiable for as long as that information is furnished for reporting.

 

They verify the BK by contacting the court of record and asking "did person X with SSN Y residing at address Z file BK on such-and-such a date?", to which the answer is "yes", hence it's verified. Or, more accurately in today's world, they go online and type the request in and get an answer. They don't pull down your entire set of paperwork. People here may claim that it should be otherwise, but I'd bet that the vast majority of courts in this country would say that they've done all that they're required to do.

 

NO, that's not how it works, see above.

 

Should that be true, that would make the courts, which are a part of our government subject to the FCRA and they are not. If the CRA wants the public information they have to go to the court and get it, just the same as you or me, OR pay someone to get it for them (that's BIG business).

 

Call ANY court and see for yourself that what you are saying isn't true.

 

Should they EVEN be able to get the information via a phone call, it does not meet the FCRA requirements for verification, it does not.

 

You are making the CRA's a part of the government, they are NOT. The government regulates their business, because they do it badly. The FCRA doesn't apply to the courts just as it does not apply to you and me. It applies to the business of credit reporting and information furnishing.

 

Should what you say be true, that would make reporting by our governmental bodies MANDATORY, it is not.

 

The courts don't answer to the CRA's and neither do we -- don't let them turn that around on you.

 

Your betting that most courts would say they have done what they are required to do is absolutely false and existing case law supports just what I have told you.

 

The courts have ruled that what you are suggesting is NOT enough once the CRA's have been notified that something is disputed. The dispute itself is the trigger, versus something that has never been disputed.

 

They verify the accounts by asking a putatively "responsible" business entity whether or not the information they were reporting regarding you is true. If those "responsible" entities say "yes", it's validated. If you want to prove to the CRAs that it's false, send them a Schedule F. Otherwise it's just your word (the word of an apparently irresponsible debtor) against the word of a company who is required by law to tell the truth. If you were a CRA, who would you believe, particularly since you are unwilling to send them documentation to prove your point?

 

No no and no again by the very requirements of the FCRA.

 

We don't have to PROVE a thing to the CRA's, THEY and the FURNISHERS of information have the only burden of verification.

 

WHY on earth would we do that for them?????

 

The CRAs are just a newspaper. They report what they're told. If you have a problem with the information that they're reporting, you need to work it out with the people who are TELLING the CRAs the wrong stuff. You should be mad at the LENDERS. THEY'RE the ones who are dicking with you.

 

Exactly, BUT, they only FIRST report what they are told. Once disputed the game changes.

 

The CRA's ARE responsible for making sure the information furnished by the lenders we should all be mad at is indeed accurate and complete; updated and verifiable.

 

The CRA's don't get to pass the buck back to the lenders. We however can hold the lenders responsible under Section 623. As well as the CRA's for allowing the lenders information to continue to be reported.

 

You can try to sue the CRA, but I bet you don't get far with it, unless they failed to investigate at all, or they reinserted in violation of the law, or they have in fact been told the correct way to report a tradeline and fail to do so. In any case, be prepared to wait a long time for resolution. It won't happen in 10 days.

 

Just search if you want to know how wrong this is.

 

This is the unstated downside of not sending the CRAs the Schedule F. You have to live with all of the incorrectly reported crap until you do all the work to fix it from the lender side. If you want to reserve for yourself the potential ability to dispute a perfectly factual BK listing from your CR well before its time is up, you have to live with the fact that in the short run, you won't get a house, because you haven't done the rest of the work yet. Your choice.

 

We don't have to do the work, it is a requirement that THEY do the work, all we have to do is notify them of our dispute.

 

There is no downside to not sending the schedule to the CRA's. They need to go get that schedule for themselves if they want it.

 

I'm not really this dogmatic, but I do think that people blame the CRAs far more than is their due. This is your lenders' fault.

 

That is their job, their chosen job, why don't you want them to play by the rules that govern their business?

 

Sassy