Yes Or No, Just looking for Your Opinion

[GST2008]

I not only think it's unfair in that instance, but also think it is unfair when you are requesting a CLI.  If you are an established customer and they have your usage and payment history available to them, as well as the ability to do a soft pull, why would they need the hard pull?  Juniper did that to me when I asked for a product switch.  I had no idea that they were going to until after the fact and then to top it off, they closed the old account and opened it as a new account and refused to give me the three plus years of history i had with them on the new card.

[MsKiwi]

---

@plasticguy wrote:
When your card expires, do you think it would be fair for the card issuer to do a HARD PULL before sending you a new card?

---

Not at all. I'm sure they can do it legally.

[Anonymous]

---

@plasticguy wrote:
When your card expires, do you think it would be fair for the card issuer to do a HARD PULL before sending you a new card?

---

I do not think they should be able to use a hard pull, however I feel a soft may be appropriate under certain circumstances. Overall, I would a company would look at your overall payment history to make the determination. That being said, in this new economy, many have to make choices to let some accounts go delinquent ... whether they want to or not. Thus, the obvious negative impact to individual credit reports which do not necessarily give the full picture.

[Anonymous]

It's completely legal for them to pull a hard periodically, the fact that you have their card gives them pp. But unless there's anything that shows up on a soft pull that would warrant a hard pull, I think it would be not just unfair, but suicidal for them to make that a company policy. I get annoyed when they do a soft pull for a simple cli, A lot of people (me included) are real testy about inquiries. If someone wanted to do a hard pull just to issue me a new card, no problem. Don't send me the darn card, I have spares. Isn't that why I have 2 sock drawers? 

Message Edited by brisdad on 11-02-2008 11:22 PM

[jmbfl]

It is totally legal for them to hard inquire at any time. They do have PP. There also is absolutely no reason to do so. They already have all the information available. Inserting a hard inquiry for an AR is just plain mean! It is also contrary to normal industry practice.

As far as Barclay/Juniper is concerned, what did you expect? They are a bunch of screwballs from start to finish. The pre-app's I receive from them are filed because I know this, so their practices do cost them business!

(BTW - A much grayer area in the field of PP for inquiry is: Can a CA post a hard inquiry in an attempt to collect a time barred, aged off debt? Think carefully before answering! FYI - I have two such hard inquiries posted to two different CBR's. I am leaving it alone for now. If any more crop up I will probably have to act!)

Message Edited by jmbfl on 11-03-2008 12:01 AM

[score_building]

---

@jmbfl wrote:

(BTW - A much grayer area in the field of PP for inquiry is: Can a CA post a hard inquiry in an attempt to collect a time barred, aged off debt? Think carefully before answering! FYI - I have two such hard inquiries posted to two different CBR's. I am leaving it alone for now. If any more crop up I will probably have to act!)

can a CA have PP if it is regarding time barred, aged off debt...  say it isn't so- pretty sneaky jmbfl.  in any case, the answer is yes for debt that is not time barred, aged off.  even though the inquiry wasn't prompted by a request for credit!  i don't think it should be allowed, so many CA's are shady operations and they end up using hard inquiries to 'punish' the 'non-compliant' but they say it is used as a 'tool' for collections.  hog wash.

i have had success disputing FOUR of these off my reports in connection with a sl.  first, i attempted to dispute directly with the CA and then through BBB, when the CA failed to comply with my initial requests.  i am among the many here that are rather sensitive to amassing avoidable inquiries, particularly those of the nonsense variety.

Message Edited by score_building on 11-03-2008 09:55 AM

[MsKiwi]

---

@jmbfl wrote:

(BTW - A much grayer area in the field of PP for inquiry is: Can a CA post a hard inquiry in an attempt to collect a time barred, aged off debt? Think carefully before answering! FYI - I have two such hard inquiries posted to two different CBR's. I am leaving it alone for now. If any more crop up I will probably have to act!)

Message Edited by jmbfl on 11-03-2008 12:01 AM

---

I'm going to take a stab at this. I would say yes they can post a hard inquiry because a debt that is not paid is still a debt. I'm probably wrong but you *should be able to dispute as time barred even though you are not supposed to be able to dispute inquiries.

Personally I would send them foad letters with a threat to sue just for **its and giggles.

It would be nice if debt collectors had just as hard a time to put info on your reports as it is difficult to get your reports corrected!

[score_building]

---

@MsKiwi wrote:

---

@jmbfl wrote:

(BTW - A much grayer area in the field of PP for inquiry is: Can a CA post a hard inquiry in an attempt to collect a time barred, aged off debt? Think carefully before answering! FYI - I have two such hard inquiries posted to two different CBR's. I am leaving it alone for now. If any more crop up I will probably have to act!)

Message Edited by jmbfl on 11-03-2008 12:01 AM

---

I'm going to take a stab at this. I would say yes they can post a hard inquiry because a debt that is not paid is still a debt. I'm probably wrong but you *should be able to dispute as time barred even though you are not supposed to be able to dispute inquiries.

Personally I would send them foad letters with a threat to sue just for **its and giggles.

It would be nice if debt collectors had just as hard a time to put info on your reports as it is difficult to get your reports corrected!

---

agree.  also, i'd bet you are right on this one MsKiwi.  at least you can request removal (dispute) from source -but not w/ cra's.

[jmbfl]

I am going to disagree:

1) You don't owe the CA anything, they are merely agents for whoever currently owns the debt, and

2) The debt you do owe is a) time barred by SOL and b) time barred from reporting on your CBR's.

I am not saying they don't have the right to inquire into your credit. However, in as much as this inquiry is derived from credit the reporting of which is barred from credit reporting any inquiry related to that debt should be barred as well. The posting of hard inquiries by CA's in an attempt to effect your CBR's circumvents the intent of the FCRA and loathesome. I believe any court of law would find it so. If anyone can provide me with citation to a legal outcome to the contrary I would appreciate it.

[Anonymous]

That's why you can't get them on the phone for hours.  They are doing hard pulls.