NEED HELP PRONTO - RE My Fico EQ and EQ difference + dispute w/CA inquiry pls collection!

[StarsongPhoenix]

Hi folks,

Not sure if I've posted this to the right forum, so moderator please move if necessary.

I have a few related situations that I need and would appreciate getting some quick help with, but I'll try to keep the detail to a minimum.

First, over thirteen years ago I paid in full a student loan package that, for a short time, I had to default on. After that, I did receive paper work from the university and collector indicating that all was paid in full. Now, that CA finally went out of business, at some point. It seemed strange to me then when, several years later, I started to periodically (every six to 10 months) get notices from different collection agencies who either bought (?) or otherwise got whatever mistaken file available to them regarding the loan package. Every time I addressed those situations by phone, though, I was left alone. Yet last year another collection agency tried to harass me, so I did some legwork, calling the university office, the US Dept of Education and retracing original payment check numbers, the copies of which can be made available to me should I need them. And once again I was left alone. But previous to my awareness of and participation in My Fico, I had no clue about checking my credit reports over time, so also had no clue about any related hard inquiries which might have shown up on earlier CRA reports. All that's now changed, as I faithfully have followed the wonderful information/advice available on these forums. I now watch my inquiry count like a hawk!

Because I have a subscription to AX's Credit Secure, I got a notice of a new inquiry just a few days ago. Wouldn't you guess, lo and behold, another bottom feeder to the fore. Since Credit Secure uses Experian, thus reflecting a false score, I did a My Fico Equifax (CRA that hard inquiry is now on) to find my actual score. THEN I bought a report direct from EQ so I could get the correct CA contact info. Imagine my shock when not only did my otherwise great 789 (Fico) score take a hit, according to My Fico down to 748 (ouch!), but EQ direct report reflected a score of 721 (double ouch!).

So, first, I can't figure out how My Fico's EQ and EQ itself could reflect such a score difference even with the score drop. I'd appreciate if anyone can fill me in about that.

As important though, is dealing with this latest group of lowlifes. I pretty much have ready both a Debt Validation letter as well as a Demand to Delete Inquiry letter. I just have some questions about the finer points. First, the actual CA notice has the company listed as Allied Interstate out of Minneapolis, MN. But the inquiry company shows different names/addresses depending on Credit Secure, My Fico's EQ report, and EQ's direct report. Credit Secure shows the CA as Collection Systems with only a street address/phone but no cit/state. My Fico simply indicates it as Allied Int, no other info. and EQ lists the CA as Collectech Systems Inc out of West Palm Beach, FL, etc.

I've done some checking; all names belong to the parent company Allied Interstate out of West Palm. But for purposes of accurate delivery and speedy resolution which actual name/address should I use? Should I send a copy of the "delete inquiry" letter attached with the debt validation letter to the Minnesota address from the actual collection notice? Or should I send just the original copy of the delete request to the Collectech company in West Palm (Allied Interstate doing business under about ten different names) and the debt validation letter to the Minneapolis Allied Interstate? Or...?

Lastly, for some reason EQ doesn't accurately reflect my full given name. Instead it lists my given name as a short/nick name version, something I've been meaning to address. For instance, if my given name were actually Kathleen (it's not, in real life), while EX and TU reflect that correctly, EQ shows it as a Kathie. Hence any student loan collection notices I've received over the years have addressed a Kathie not a Kathleen. My question about this is as follows. (By the way, the original loan papers DID reflect my full given name, so I don't know where the mix-up began or keeps happening.)

In "signing" these two letters - not with my real signature of course -  even though I sign all formal documents with either my full given plus last name or first two initial plus my last name, am I better off - in these two instances - signing both letters with the EQ "recognized" short version of my first name? In other words, should I use a return address and sign the letters indicating a "Kathie Smith" or as a "Kathleen Smith?"  I don't know how much this matters, but do feel it's important to find out before I post the two letters. I also am aware that I should send both CMRRR, but keeping the 30 days time I have to address both the collection notice and inquiry, I'd like to post these by tomorrow, WED, OCT 13.

So...sorry for all the detail I had to put in this post, in the end, but any help/advice I can receive promptly will be very much appreciated.

Thanks, in advance.

PS - The only CRA reflecting any (and only one) of the student loans (and only as being closed) is TU; don't know if that matters in this case.

eta - Other than showing a radically different score between MY Fico EQ and EQ itself, all other info on each report is identical with 3% utilization and less than half the accounts reporting comparatively small balances (standard for me on a regular basis and still getting a pretty regular 787-789 score on EQ, while TU Fico hovers around 786 and EX Fico - I've been told by two creditors - just under 800).

[Anonymous]

Hi StarsongPhoenix!

First, a bit of clarification-- Allied Interstate *only* placed a hard inquiry on your EQ report, correct? A derogatory tradeline for a defaulted student loan was *not* placed, correct?

The first issue is "permissible purpose" to request your credit report. Assuming this INQ is about the paid student loan, then AI wouldn't have permissible purpose. At any rate, there is one 'school of thought' that firmly believes that placing a hard INQ is also "contact" by the CA, and that they must respond w/in 5 days with a letter. Having not done that, they may be in violation of the FDCPA for both lacking permissible purpose & failing to provide you with a dunning letter.

For this matter, I'd suggest that protect your legal interests (aka sue them) by sending them a "permissible purpose" letter. You should be able to search the forums to find a good example. Send the letter CMRR to the AI corporate HQ. DO NOT sign the letter at all. Use your full first and last name (typed) only. I would wait 7 days from the date of INQ, and send a DV letter, CMRR as well.

With regard to your name being wrong, you can contact the CRA directly (online, via phone, or via letter) to find out what the current process is for correcting your name.

[StarsongPhoenix]

Hello LilMirth,

Thank you SOO much for your prompt response and information. I really appreciate it!

To answer your question, yes Allied Interstate *only* placed a hard inquiry on my EQ report. In fact, I have no collections outstanding or other derogatory info reporting. I did follow your advice in writing/mailing/not signing my permissible purpose letter, including mailing it to the company headquarters. Also, I did only use my full first and last name.

Based on everything I've read wherever I could, I believe you are correct that they do/did not have permissible purpose to make the inquiry. I also did complete preparing the DV letter. If I do need to send it, would your suggestion be to mail that, too, to the headquarters, or to the address they request you to respond? In this case, the former is in West Palm Beach, FL, and the latter is in Minneapolis, MN.

I say "if I need to send it" because this afternoon I finally took another step, one I perhaps should've considered doing when this all first started. I tracked down (on the web) who Allied contracts with. Turns out they are just one of several agencies contracted by the US Dept of Education. I finally found a toll free number, called it and was able to explain my long running situation to the USDE's Default Resolution department.

When I told the fellow there I'm almost at my wit's end, about this, he did check and verify all monies on the defaulted student loan were in fact paid when I said they were. As a result, he will first mail me a letter stating I am free and clear of any student loan debt (with the USDE, but I also have no other private student loans). He will also contact Allied to have the company close off the collections attempt. And by doing this, he feels I will be removed from any existing list that would otherwise permit other contracted CAs from attempting to collect on this closed package of loans. He did also say it was my choice to either then send the DV letter or simply a copy of the one the USDE will send me, which should finally resolve the problem. So I will see how that goes. I should received that letter in the next 7-10 business days.

Although you don't have to answer this if you no longer have time, I would be curious to know if you think I should still send a DV letter without or with a copy of the one USDE will mail to me.

I am also still curious to know if EQ's direct "Score Power" report continues to be based on FICO scoring, as I simply can't understand the 27 point spread between My Fico's 748 EQ score and EQ's Score Power rating of 721. So I am still open to anyone else's reply on this as well.

Thanks again, LilMirth for the info. I've just been furious, these last few days, about this continuing saga. Now I feel equipped to resolve this matter once and for all.

[Anonymous]

I'd go ahead and send the DV after 5+2 days (for mailing). This, because I'd fully intend to go after AI for non-permissible purpose & failing to provide a dunning notice. The salve for my frustration would be the cash out of their pockets. I'd send that DV to the corporate HQ of AI. And, I'd happily wait for the proof from the U.S. Dept. of Education to use as evidence in a lawsuit, or the settlement discussions. I would NOT send them a copy of the USDE letter with the 1st DV letter. I'd wait for them to respond to the DV letter, and then go after them full steam.

Even if I didn't intend to sue them, I'd probably follow through with the DV to establish a papertrail should they ever sell this (assuming this is regarding a paid student loan) as "junk debt" to another CA.

I'll have to do some digging about the EQ Direct Score Power report. I'll reply back as soon as I find something out.

[fuzzy-bear]

Score Watch by EQ. is Fico based, On Score Power you have to call customer service and ask for the Fico based Score Power, not offered on their site. I repeat be sure to call customer service to get the Fico based Score Power. (you must be specific)

I have walked that path recently.

[StarsongPhoenix]

I agree, LilMirth. It makes sense to still send the DV, and to the headquarters not just the PO Box on the CA Notice. Plus it was my feeling, too, to not include a copy of the USDE forthcoming letter. Allied is the one who came after me, is the one who wrongfully made the inquiry to EQ. Having a paper trail, as you said, can give me not only the fire power to deal with the current situation - whether I sue or not - but also to protect myself in the event of any new eruptions by additional parties.

Thanks again.

[StarsongPhoenix]

---

@fuzzy-bear wrote:

Score Watch by EQ. is Fico based, On Score Power you have to call customer service and ask for the Fico based Score Power, not offered on their site. I repeat be sure to call customer service to get the Fico based Score Power. (you must be specific)

I have walked that path recently.

---

fuzzy-bear, thanks so much for that differentiation. I was really bewildered. This must be something relatively new, though - say within the last 6-8 months. The reason I say that is, when I last requested a direct EQ report several months back, the website clearly stated one would be receiving a FICO scoring. Which was also the case for my previous requests.

Funny thing is, during this last request process, I remember wondering where the "FICO Score" language was, as it was so clearly stated in the product offering in times past. Still, I felt I needed to get the info asap, so went ahead with the purchase anyway. The result was I never got the correct Allied address off the report and ended up being shocked and frustrated at the wide score difference. Live and learn, I guess. From now on, I'll be sure to call and request the right report.

Thanks again. At least now I know.