Credit Cards

[susanhannah]

I posted yesterday about AMEX sending my account to a CA, even though my payments have been on time and I pay above the minimum.  I obtained my credit reports from all three agencies and found that the CA made four inquiries on April 28th and four on April 29th.  This appears on all three reports.

Is that within their rights to so?

Thanks,

SusanHannah

[UpNComing]

---

susanhannah wrote:

I posted yesterday about AMEX sending my account to a CA, even though my payments have been on time and I pay above the minimum.  I obtained my credit reports from all three agencies and found that the CA made four inquiries on April 28th and four on April 29th.  This appears on all three reports.

Is that within their rights to so?

Thanks,

SusanHannah

---

This is easily one of the craziest things I've ever heard of!  Unless there is something on the UA with Amex, I can't imagine they have any right to pull your credit.  Were they hard or soft inquiries?

[cheddar]

Pintos v. Pacific Creditors in the 9th Circuit ruled that a CA does NOT have PP if they are collecting on a non-credit-related transaction.

There has been some discussion on these forums about whether a CA has PP to pull a hard inquiry for credit-related transactions.  I maintain that they do, but others disagree with me.  The issue has not been settled by a court, AFAIK.

Having said that, four inquiries is outrageous.

[FretlessMayhem]

Is it possible that someone gained access to your account and made fraudulent charges? Perhaps an AU did something bad?

Have you talked to Amex as to why your account in good standing has been sent to collections?

[FretlessMayhem]

---

cheddar wrote:

Pintos v. Pacific Creditors in the 9th Circuit ruled that a CA does NOT have PP if they are collecting on a non-credit-related transaction.

There has been some discussion on these forums about whether a CA has PP to pull a hard inquiry for credit-related transactions. I maintain that they do, but others disagree with me. The issue has not been settled by a court, AFAIK.

Having said that, four inquiries is outrageous.

---

If it has been ruled they can't pull a hard on a non-credit transaction, doesn't that mean that is de facto ruled that they do have PP on a credit transaction?