Forum
|
|
Forum
|
     | Tuesday, December 21, 1999 - 11:55 am  OK, folks, I thought this was a forum for people to help people with credit problems, maybe I was wrong. I have posted several messages in the last week, only to be argued with, by people that don't know the law. This law is called the Fair Credit Reporting Act(FCRA),and if you are not familiar with it, read it, it's very simple. If you have a dispute over an item on your credit report, it has to be inaccurate. If you have a paid collection account, and it shows that way, don't bitch.Collection accounts can be reported for 7 years, whether or not they are paid or not, as long as the balance is accurate. If your collection account shows a balance of $500.00 and you can prove it is paid in full, then you have a dispute. Write a letter to the Credit Reporting Agency (CRA), SAVE a copy for your records, this is admissable as evidence. The CRA has 30 days, according to the FCRA to reinvestigate your dispute and either confirm the information as accurate or they have to amend/delete it. There are exceptions, ie; a 15 day extension. Here's a very important update to the FCRA: You may ask the CRA, within 5 days, to provide you with the procedures they followed to reinvestigate your dispute, and they have 15 days to answer. SAVE it, it's admissable as evidence. If any one of you reading this ever files suit (Complaint) against a CRA, you will have to prove, first and foremost, that the CRA failed to follow reasonable procedures to assure the maximum possible accuracy of the information in your credit report. You will not survive Summary Judgement if you don't. It's called a prima ficia case. I hired an attorney, he filed the lawsuit, he wanted to settle out of court, so I fired him. This Complaint was filed on Sept. 6, 1996, and I proceeded pro se (representing yourself)from then on.Discovery was 180 days, in which interrogatories (questions)were asked and request for production of documents took place. There were motions for sanctions, pre-trial conferences, proposed jury instructions and voir dire. The trial took place on June 17 and 18, 1998, and the jury found Equifax guilty of failing to follow those reasonable proceedures. The District Court(I feel)made some wrong decisions, and this case now stands in front of the 9th Circuit, with all briefs filed. My case was filed in 1996 before the FCRA was amended, so I'm not totally up on the new amendments, but don't make it hard, these are very simple laws to understand. I would be more than happy to help anyone with a problem with the CRA's.
|
| | Tuesday, December 21, 1999 - 03:56 pm Yes, it IS a forum to help people. But you seem to be doing just the opposite. You're telling people "if it's accurate, live with it and don't do anything about it". We're here to tell them that they CAN do something about it, regardless of whether your personal interpretation of the FCRA is correct or not. And you are not correct regarding the issue discussed on the other thread. You're telling people to pay their debt and live with a derogatory item on their report. Why should they have to if a creditor is willing to ammend the original agreement, re-age the account (do you even know what that means), or remove it completely as part of the ammended agreement? That's crazy. If that was the case, there would be no purpose for this forum or this site. Feel free to post when the information is useful to the visitors of this site, eh?
|
| | Tuesday, December 21, 1999 - 05:33 pm Hey, Gary, don't go away yet. I haven't run into anybody who took them on in court. Because of that, you are the genuine article and that makes your posts the most compelling I've seen-- here, or anywhere else.
|
| | Wednesday, December 22, 1999 - 07:05 am And let's not forget that it's always good to have legal advice from someone competent. What is the old saying? A man who represents himself has a fool for a client? When I need surgery, I don't go to an auto mechanic who thinks Anatomy and Physiology is simple to understand - I go to a surgeon who practices SURGERY. So as to what we called "Sea Lawyer" advice when I was in the Navy, Caveat Emptor...
|
| | Friday, December 24, 1999 - 11:05 am This is not legal advice, I am not an attorney, and to give legal advice is "unauthorized practice of law". Surgery? Do you go to the doctor for headaches (normally)? Have you never tried to cure an ailment on your own? If I would have been on trial for murder, that's one thing, but the FCRA is alot different.
|
| | Friday, December 24, 1999 - 11:20 am Gary, it is unfair (your analogy) in this particular case. I was a Corpsman in the United States Navy for 8 years, and in fact did see patients under the guidance of a physician. Think of me as a mini-PA in that setting. I no longer work in medicine (the pay is too low) but I still treat myself for minor injuries and illnesses. It is unfair on another level: Once you actually go to court, and appeal things, you are WELL into "surgery" as it were.
|
| | Friday, December 24, 1999 - 05:06 pm Gary, I'm a little confused. The heading states "I sued Equifax and won", but since you disagree with the district court's ruling, I would assume that they ruled against you. Who won that decision? Are you the party who appealed to the 9th circuit to overturn an adverse ruling or was it Equifax?
|
| | Saturday, December 25, 1999 - 01:00 am The story is he wanted punitive damages, and the court denied that, so he is appealing.
|
| | Saturday, December 25, 1999 - 02:10 am The case in a nutshell, revolves around two student loans, issued in 1981, defaulted in 1982 and 1983, discharged in bankruptcy in May of 1985. In December of 1985, these loans were assigned to the U.S. Department of Education (DOE)Seven years later, in 1992, the DOE decided to collect on these loans, attached my income tax refund and reported them to all threee Credit Reporting Agencies (CRA).So much for the Bankruptcy Protection Act, huh? So, after I cleared this up with the DOE, two of the CRA's removed the information while Equifax continued to report it for four more years, that I was unaware of, until August 1996. After being denied credit due to an Equifax report in July 1996, I sent off for the credit report from Equifax, and there it was. A defaulted student loan, collection account, and listed as date reported 10-85. Suit was filed and trial was held, the jury found Equifax guilty of "failing to follow reasonable procedures". What was wrong with the trial? Equifax submitted a proposed jury instruction, stating Equifax had the right to report defaulted student loans for seven years from the first date the DOE reported them to Equifax. According to 20 U.S.C. 1080f(2)they were correct, the judge agreed, and the jury was so instructed. The judge refused to give the jury seven other instructions by me, for seven more violations of the FCRA. I appealed the District Court's decision for abuse of discretion, fraud, and fraud upon the court. Why, you ask? The DOE does not issue student loans, private lenders, such as banks, issue student loans The DOE guarntees them. If a student loan is discharged in BK court, what happens to it? Can the lender turn it over to the DOE 8 months later for payment? Can the DOE then try to collect on it? Can Equifax report it? For how long? Punitive damages can be awarded for willfully only, and it's hard to prove.
|
| | Saturday, December 25, 1999 - 03:15 am Does this http://acb.cyberserv.com/qs/qspage.cfm?PageID=90 have anything to do with your case?
|
| | Saturday, December 25, 1999 - 07:03 pm The question remains unanswered Greg, no that doesn't have anything to do with it. What happens to a "defaulted" student loan doesn't matter, in my case, these loans were legally discharged in BK. (Prior to assignment to the DOE)The District Court resurrected these loans after 13 years, in trial, hence, the appeal. For the people out there that would like to know a few facts: If you would like to attempt to repair your credit by having the "furnisher" of the information make false or misleading representations to the CRA's, don't ever set foot in court. You can try to get the "furnishers" (creditors) to delete or modify the information, such as changing the date, saying it was a mistake, or whatever, but hang on to your bank account if the CRA's ever take you to court. A little insider info here: after you file the Complaint, you are required to meet with the other party and plan for discovery. I had that meeting, and I ask, "has Equifax ever been sued?" The answer was, "hundreds of times".(me) And? (them)"They always settle out of court." Equifax offered to settle out of court for $4000.00 three weeks after the Complaint was filed. It costs about $200.00 to file the Complaint, you do the math. If you have a legitimate case, you can probably win evertime. I personally think everyone that has a case should file suit.
|
Credit Forum CreditCourt Forum 2003 Credit Suit CreditFactors Order Credit Reports |