Right.
I may be able to shed some light on the issue after some court action. My NACA attorney, who is filing suit for me against the JDB for other FDCPA violations, wanted me to send him copies of my letter to TransUnion and their answer on their letter head. He also thinks that disputing is very much a process of litigating as one must be seen as going to the source of the problem rather than just filing suit and expecting the court take care of the matter.
I don't understand why TransUnion seems to be going out of their way to "not find" the inquiry in the first place. I don't buy that they simply missed the last inquiry which should still be listed. Nevertheless, this will be my suggestion to them to give them a possible out. It is my purpose to elicit their help in sending me evidence against the JDB, not to look for violations to sue TransUnion. Regardless, by the time my attorney wishes to draw them into the fray, they will have been given ample opportunity to cooperate in my investigation of the inquiries and ultimately, had not only had failed to produce but willfully chose to cover up violations.
My JDB is a huge JDB and, according to the cr's from the Big 3, does business exclusively with TransUnion. I can understand why they would want to protect one of their cash cows but a good lawsuit will put a big bite into those profits. The cases I have read reveal that courts do not like it when any CRA violates the sanctity of personal financial records of consumers and assess high punitive damages along with the regular statutory damages.
The problem probably is that thousands of consumers threaten to sue but only a handful actually file.
