Credit Bureaus Break The Law And Fight Your Credit Repair Efforts

I've been wanting to talk about this for a long time now.  I have been very successful in my efforts to help people clean up their credit reports for many, many years now.  I tell people that it used to be fairly easy.  I would examine the credit reports, find the errors, find the information that was negative, write letters to the collectors, creditors, and bureaus, and within a couple months, most of the items would be removed.  I could look at a credit report and tell the client, this will easily come off, this will take a few letters, this might give you some trouble, and this might not ever come off. I knew how to remove pretty much anything negative on credit reports, and any inquiries or personal information that the client wanted off.  You see, I know for a fact that no company has to leave any information on anyone's credit report for 7-10 years.  In fact, none of it has to ever be reported at all.  There's no law that requires any company furnish information about a consumer to any credit bureau.  But, that's not what they will tell you!  And its not so easy to get good results all the time anymore.

When I say "they", I mean the credit bureaus, creditors, collectors, the FTC, and plenty of website owners, bloggers, article and editorial writers, any of them that just regurgitate the lie that bad credit has to stay on your credit  report for years and years and only time will heal.  They love to say if it belongs to you, even if its negative, it has to stay on.  Now, I can give a pass to the writers that are just incompetent egomaniacs striving to justify their self acclaimed "expert" status.  They're lazy and haven't bothered to really research the laws on the subject, but the rest of them "in the business", they are flat out, just BIG FAT LIARS!  They know full well or should know full well, that these claims are a load of crap.

In recent years, the industry folks that we must communicate with, have made it so much more difficult to clean up the credit reports.  There is a push back against obeying the law by these lawbreakers. They don't seem to care that they have no proof, they've committed fraud, they've allowed errors or false information to make their way onto consumer credit reports and stay there.  They have found that they can make so much money even while breaking the law, its more profitable to keep breaking the law and hope that the consumer gives up.  In fact, they are so twisted in their games, that collectors and creditors are coming out of the woodwork and suing consumers a lot more often now and issuing 1099-C's without proving squat, that my mind is boggled.  They sue just because most people won't or don't know how to respond and they get default judgments.

Credit repair is not as simple anymore as just writing letters and stuff comes off the credit report.  Credit bureaus are in flagrant opposition of the law and they know it, but they seem to think that if they keep spewing lies, and bloggers and self proclaimed "experts" keep repeating it enough, the consumer is stupid enough to believe it and accept that their reports are just going to have to stay bad for 7-10 years.  Consumers aren't stupid!  Some may be lazy. Some may not have very good research skills or access to a computer to study and learn, or a library with relevant information, but my readers aren't stupid and they're consumers.  You aren't stupid because you kept looking for answers. You're on this blog learning the truth. You didn't just accept their lies. You knew in your gut that what you've been told is not the truth. You kept looking till you found someone who would confirm it to you.

I want to share a segment that 60 Minutes did on credit bureaus. After the video, I've got a link to Experian's response.  What a crock!  I'll make a few comments after the video about the video and about their response.

First I have a comment about some claims made in the video.  There is No Way I believe only 40% of consumers have errors on their reports. Maybe more like 94% would be closer to the truth. I find it funny that the FTC claims there is only 1 out of 5 consumers with "an" "error" on their report.  I think the operative words in his statement are "an" and "error".  He could have dropped the word "an" and said "errors" instead of "error" and then it would have been more than his claimed "1 out of 5".  This is complete spin.  He could have also used the phrase "obvious errors" and been more accurate, because without actual investigations, they cannot "accurately" determine how many errors there actually are.

Now, here is a rebuttal by Experian. (Read my comments before you click on the link so you can see what I'm talking about). http://www.experian.com/blogs/news/2013/02/11/60-minutes/

This is comical.  They falsely claim they are 100% in compliance with the FCRA. What a big load of BS! Even worse, I think every single person and company doing credit repair should join together and file a huge class action lawsuit for their slander.  They have the gall to insinuate that we are all scammers and commit fraud with their statement, "...the result of dispute requests from fraudulent credit repair companies who attempt to scam consumers into disputing accurate data..." which clearly shows how much they hate consumers who attempt to clean up their credit and anyone who attempts to help them or hold the bureaus accountable and compliant with the law.

You can also see by their statement, the itty bitty section I quoted, that they continue to spew the lie about negative information if accurate, needing to remain on the credit reports.  Well, I'm no dummy and I don't think any of you are either. They're not going to fool us by trying to phrase their false claims into a sentence that has the potential to sound factual. I'd rather research the law and rely on what that says, any day, over what any bureau rep or one of their lobbyists, tries to force me to believe.

So, though its harder now and takes longer, credit repair does work. We need to use laws against them. We must continue to hold their feet to the fire. They tell the truth that you can repair your credit yourself but that's about the extent of their honesty. Sometimes people don't want to handle that burden all by themselves.  Most of us who help others fix their credit do so with a good heart and a desire to help others.  If you would like help with your credit, I would love to help you. You will see that I do have a heart for helping others.  You can call me and talk to me or email me and I'll respond.  My contact info is up on the top right corner under my picture.  You can also leave a comment below if you like this post or I've helped you with your credit.  If you have questions, please email me as well as posting a comment.  That way, others with the same question will get the benefit of my answer but in your email, I can be a lot more specific for your needs.

If you have found this blog helpful to you, please consider donating as a sign of your appreciation for information I have freely given to you.  The "Donate" button is on the right side bar.  Thank you for your generosity.

Validation Vs. Verification ~ Defeating the Chaudhry Claim of Debt Collectors

I have not written anything lately because for one, I have been very busy but the second reason is because sometimes I just don't know what would be a good topic to cover.  However, I'm working on a couple lawsuits for clients right now and today, my client sent me the plaintiff's response to her Motion to Dismiss.  The whole entire thing looks like it was put together by an intern with no experience writing briefs or no consistency of thought. Its like they decided to whine that nothing was relevant so boohoo, the court should not grant her motion.  They threw all kinds of stuff into their response, and as I have been researching, I came across a website that had one whole section that was word for word verbatim of one of the points in their response.  Can you say "copy/paste"?  So lame!

Anyhow, the one thing that jumped out at me is the forever favorite fall back case law that they quote, Chaudhry v. Gallerizzo.  Now, I have written about this case law and how to throw other case law back in the collection agency's face.  But here's the problem.  Our court system has what are called "Circuit courts" and they represent sections of the country.  I'm in the 9th Circuit designation.  Unfortunately, many of these circuit courts have upheld the Chaudhry decision for collection lawsuits so you need to know how to fight back.

The Chaudhry case upheld a very minimum standard for Verification.  But, you shouldn't be sending a "Verification" letter to collectors.  Verification is what credit bureaus do.  You send collectors "Validation" letters.  Though it may seem that verification and validation are the same thing, they are NOT!  Collectors love to use the word interchangeably but we need to stand firm on this.  Validation is the Proof. Verification according to the Chaudhry decision, is making sure they have the right person.  They only have to provide you with the Original creditor name, account number, dates, amount owed to supposedly prove that they are attempting to collect from the correct person.   They claim that they don't have to provide detailed records.  They may get away with that explanation during the dispute process, and they might get away with it in court, but not if you know more about Verification and Validation.

The best way I think to explain this so you can beat these lying vultures, is to bring legal resources into the argument.  You start with defining the two words.  Now, I look through many different legal dictionaries that would have some standing in court. You want to build a case against the collector through the dispute process so that you have this folder full of a documented paper trail where you have taken it to them and they continue to violate the law.  That way, when you've had enough, you have the ammunition to sue them, or you have the case built to defend yourself if they take you to court first. Hopefully, there won't have to be any litigation and you can get rid of them by showing them how they will fail if it goes to court.

Validation according to Black's Law Dictionary is "Assessing an action to determine it is complete, correct, implemented and delivering the correct outcome." I actually like the definition given by the Oxford Dictionaries better.  To "Validate" means "to check or prove the validity or accuracy of something" and "Validation" is a derivative of the word "Validate."  Now, did you notice that it means to "PROVE" the accuracy?  This is important.  My favorite definition that is very clear comes from Merriam-Webster, which says "to show the existence or truth of, by evidence." Remember this while I give you the definition of "Verify."

Verification according to Black's Law Dictionary is "... averment that the party pleading is ready to establish the truth of what he has set forth." Also, it goes on to say, "The examination of a writing for the purpose of ascertaining its truth; or a certificate or affidavit that it is true." Now, it also gives some case law and you will see how these collectors fall short.  The court said "Confirmation of the correctness, truth, or authenticity of a pleading, account, or other paper, by an affidavit, oath, or deposition." McDonald v. Rosengarten, 134 111. 126, 25 N. E. ; and Summerfield v. Phoenix Assur. Co. (C. C-) 65 Fed. 296; and Patterson v. Brooklyn, 6 App. Div. 127, 40 N.Y. Supp. 581.

Did you catch what these definitions are saying?  Its saying that "Validation" is the documented proof. Its not just "yeah, we have the right person and here's what you owe and who the original creditor is that you incurred the debt with." Oh, no.  Not even close!  Validation is the PROOF!!!  Don't forget that.  You demand validation, you demand proof.  You are not demanding hearsay, which is what they give you. Hang on to this stuff. Its powerful and important.  I'm so not done destroying their claim of "verification" yet.

Okay, let's tear apart their claim of "Verification."  Did you notice that not just in the definition, but in the supporting case law, that "verification" is them attesting to or certifying or confirming that their claims are true and they can prove it in court?  That's what verification is.  It is swearing under oath that you can prove your claims.  I'm going to break this down for you even more.  When in court, who can testify as a witness?  The answer is, a person with FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE!  They saw something for themselves, they had the conversation, they were a party to whatever situation, etc.  If they do not have first hand knowledge and try to testify that they heard that the defendant told the other person something or the company claimed that the defendant ran up the debt---STOP RIGHT THERE!  That's HEARSAY and not allowed in court.  Its not evidence of squat!

Oh but there's so much more regarding verification.  A 3rd party collector CANNOT themselves verify any alleged debt.  Why? Look at the last couple paragraphs above.  They were not on the original contract. They were not a party to the original transaction.  They were not personally involved from the get go nor were they employees of the original creditor nor did they ever personally handle the alleged account when it was with the original creditor.  All they can provide is "Hearsay."   Now let's look at what the FDCPA says about verification.  I'm tying this all together and you will see very soon how you can whip their butts with this stuff.

The FDCPA regarding "Verification" and "Validation" of debts is found in 1692g. I'm going to show you how they do not verify nor validate when you demand validation. It is found in (b) of 1692g.  Here's a portion of that which is very important. It says, "...the debt collector shall cease collection of the debt, or any disputed portion thereof, until the debt collector obtains verification of the debt or a copy of a judgment, or the name and address of the original creditor, AND a copy of such verification or judgment or name and address of the original creditor, is mailed to the consumer by the debt collector."  I capitalized the "AND" for emphasis.  They have to send you a copy of the verification.  What is verification again?  It is swearing under oath that they can provide the proof.  How many times have you received a response from a 3rd party collector that has the name of the original creditor, amount of debt, relevant dates, etc. accompanied by a notarized statement from the original creditor "verifying" that they have the proof and are willing and able to testify with first hand knowledge that the 3rd party's claim are valid?  I'm willing to bet that 99.99% of you will say "NEVER!!"

They don't send a statement from the original creditor, sworn under oath, by someone authorized, willing and able to testify in court. That means, they never truly verify the alleged debt. When they send copies of statements, computer printouts, letters claiming they consulted with the original creditor or checked their records, they send you the name, address, amount, etc., but no notarized statement from the original creditor, remember this:  They have not validated, they have not verified, they have failed.  

So they can throw the Chaudhry v. Gallerizzo case at you all they want. They can throw other case law at you like Graziano v. Harrison claiming that computer printouts are sufficient. But, if they lack true verification, a notarized statement by a qualified representative of the original creditor that they attest to the validity of the alleged debt and will testify as much with the documentation, in court, they have failed at validation. They have failed at verification. They have not qualified their claim to allow them to resume or continue collection activity in accordance with the FDCPA.  

That's how you shoot down their bs. That's how you take it to them in your disputes and in your lawsuits, whether initiated by them or you. That's how you should win!

I'd love to hear from you.  If you have questions, email me or call me. If you don't want to repair your credit by yourself, I'd love to help you. Again email me or call me.  My information is up at the top on the right hand side. If you loved this information and it helps you, please leave a comment below.  I don't allow spam with links to porn sites or substandard credit repair sites to post.  But, I love legitimate comments and recommendations for more credit repair topics you'd like me to cover.  Those will be approved right away.

If you have found this blog helpful to you, please consider donating as a sign of your appreciation for information I have freely given to you.  The "Donate" button is on the right side bar.  Thank you for your generosity.