No credit card required
Browse credit cards from a variety of issuers to see if there's a better card for you.
@MojaveMoon wrote:
"Experian loses ruling that could strengthen Fair Credit Reporting Act"
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-experian-privacy1-2009may01,0,3821982.story
By Carol J. Williams
May 1, 2009
Excellent ruling! Collectors have long been notorious for finding every possible excuse for going after the relatives of deadbeats, especially when they figure a solvent relative will cough up the money in order to protect his or her credit rating.
http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2009/04/30/0417485.pdf
If I'm reading this superseding opinion right, and I caution I'm not a lawyer in real life or on TV, three things are of considerable importance here in the revised Pintos decision.
1) EX is on the hook for providing the CR to the CA. They aren't being allowed to claim the CA told us they had PP. So Maria Pintos gets to sue and probably collect against EX.
2) CAs, it would appear, can no longer pull CRs and claim PP unless there is a court ordered judgment against the debtor. If you live in the Ninth Circuit, and even if you don't, if a JDB or other bottom feeder is pinging your CRs with INQs you might be in for a payday if you sue the CA.
3) The records won't get sealed up and locked away as EX wanted.
If I'm right, these are all good things, IMHO.
"They can also point to the dissent of one of the three judges, Carlos T. Bea, who argued that Pintos did trigger the agencies' sharing of her credit history by her decision to leave the vehicle on a public street "where she knew it might be towed."'
Not sure about everyone else, but when I choose a parking spot, I typically don't factor in which spot is most likely to result in a hard inquiry on my credit report.
Hi Noah,
@Anonymous wrote:http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2009/04/30/0417485.pdf
If I'm reading this superseding opinion right, and I caution I'm not a lawyer in real life or on TV, three things are of considerable importance here in the revised Pintos decision.
1) EX is on the hook for providing the CR to the CA. They aren't being allowed to claim the CA told us they had PP. So Maria Pintos gets to sue and probably collect against EX.
2) CAs, it would appear, can no longer pull CRs and claim PP unless there is a court ordered judgment against the debtor. If you live in the Ninth Circuit, and even if you don't, if a JDB or other bottom feeder is pinging your CRs with INQs you might be in for a payday if you sue the CA.Could you please elaborate on how you arrived at this conclusion?
3) The records won't get sealed up and locked away as EX wanted.
If I'm right, these are all good things, IMHO.
Thanks.
@valley_man0505 wrote:"They can also point to the dissent of one of the three judges, Carlos T. Bea, who argued that Pintos did trigger the agencies' sharing of her credit history by her decision to leave the vehicle on a public street "where she knew it might be towed."'
Not sure about everyone else, but when I choose a parking spot, I typically don't factor in which spot is most likely to result in a hard inquiry on my credit report.
Lets hope he doesnt get to preside on cases dealing with crimes like rape.