Cell phone number listed on cr

[Downto0]

What is your reference?

Norman, all creditors want a contact number and most people use cell phones.

We did not even know that our cell phone numbers were being listed until a friend of mine told me about his experience of receiving robo calls because the CRAs were listing his cell phone number on his cr.  

Worse yet, a lot of consumers don't even get a copy of their crs.  How would those consumer tell the CRA to take their cell phone number off of their cr?

Credit reports are worse than being public.  This is where JDBs troll.  They have not met a cell phone number that they did not robo call.

CRAs bear a serious responsibility to keep private information private.  They can get away with listing the financial information data furnishers give them simply because that is what the data furnisher gave them and the CRA would not have any way of knowing that information is correct, or not. until the consumer complains.  

Cell phone numbers are different.  CRAs know one has to have prior express consent to robo call.  They could assume that the data furnisher had pec, but even that would be an assumption.  Clearly, however, they could not even assume that everyone else had pec but that's what they are doing when they publish cell phone numbers.

I have not found any reference which is dispositive.  If any of you guys have anything which supports your opinion then I'd like to take a look at it.

[Anonymous]

If you choose to only use cell phones, then you must accept the consequences of that choice.

There are many low cost solutions to this issue:

Magic Jack - $39.99 a year

Vonge - $15 a month

Skype number - $2.99 a month

 Don't expect special teatment becuase you choose not to have a landline, thats an unreasonable expectation.

If there is one thing I have learned from this whole credit repair process and this site, is to accept respnsibility and consequences of the choices we make.

[Downto0]

Everything you said is conclusory and circular.

Do you have any references to support your opinion?

[RobertEG]

The CRAs are not expected to conclude in advance that everyone will violate the statute and make robo-calls to cell phones.

[Anonymous]

Lete me break this down bit by bit

---

@Downto0 wrote:

What is your reference?

Norman, all creditors want a contact number and most people use cell phones. So do I, but I also maintain a landline. If a creditor want a number thats the one I give out. Why is that so difficult? It baffles me that people are willing to pay $100 a month or more for a cell phone but don't want to pay $3-$15 per month to maintain a landline.

We did not even know that our cell phone numbers were being listed until a friend of mine told me about his experience of receiving robo calls because the CRAs were listing his cell phone number on his cr. See below 

Worse yet, a lot of consumers don't even get a copy of their crs.  How would those consumer tell the CRA to take their cell phone number off of their cr? Every consumer is entitled to a FREE copy of each of the major credit reports once per year. Thats been the law for over ten years. If you're not taking advantage of that, thats on you.

Credit reports are worse than being public.  This is where JDBs troll.  They have not met a cell phone number that they did not robo call. "Trolling" is highly illegal. A JDB cannot legally pull a report unless they have permissible purpose - meaning thay must hold a debt owed by the person who they are pulling. They cannot pull randomly.

CRAs bear a serious responsibility to keep private information private.  They can get away with listing the financial information data furnishers give them simply because that is what the data furnisher gave them and the CRA would not have any way of knowing that information is correct, or not. until the consumer complains. Yes, thats how the system works. If something is incorrect, its up to you to let them know. 

Cell phone numbers are different.  And thats changing. Eventually the landline will disappear completely. Then they won't be *different*. CRAs know one has to have prior express consent to robo call.  They could assume that the data furnisher had pec, but even that would be an assumption.  Clearly, however, they could not even assume that everyone else had pec but that's what they are doing when they publish cell phone numbers. It's unlawful to robo-call cell phones. Its unreasonable for the CRA's to assume that all CA's will violate the law.

I have not found any reference which is dispositive.  If any of you guys have anything which supports your opinion then I'd like to take a look at it.

---

[Anonymous]

If one provides their cell phone number as their contact number to a creditor and that number is reported to the CRAs, how do you expect the CRAs to know it is a cell phone number vs. a landline or VOIP? It's simply a contact number to them. This is why I never give my cell phone number to creditors, only my VOIP line.

[Downto0]

I'm still looking for references.

Huffing and puffing will not blow my house down.

[Anonymous]

References where appropriate:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Lete me break this down bit by bit

---

@Downto0 wrote:

What is your reference?

Norman, all creditors want a contact number and most people use cell phones. So do I, but I also maintain a landline. If a creditor want a number thats the one I give out. Why is that so difficult? It baffles me that people are willing to pay $100 a month or more for a cell phone but don't want to pay $3-$15 per month to maintain a landline. reference: vanage.com magicjack.com skype.com

We did not even know that our cell phone numbers were being listed until a friend of mine told me about his experience of receiving robo calls because the CRAs were listing his cell phone number on his cr. See below  Just look around.

Worse yet, a lot of consumers don't even get a copy of their crs.  How would those consumer tell the CRA to take their cell phone number off of their cr? Every consumer is entitled to a FREE copy of each of the major credit reports once per year. Thats been the law for over ten years. If you're not taking advantage of that, thats on you. reference: FTC Website

Credit reports are worse than being public.  This is where JDBs troll.  They have not met a cell phone number that they did not robo call. "Trolling" is highly illegal. A JDB cannot legally pull a report unless they have permissible purpose - meaning thay must hold a debt owed by the person who they are pulling. They cannot pull randomly. reference: see FCRA sec. 619 "Obtaining Information Under False Pretenses"

CRAs bear a serious responsibility to keep private information private.  They can get away with listing the financial information data furnishers give them simply because that is what the data furnisher gave them and the CRA would not have any way of knowing that information is correct, or not. until the consumer complains. Yes, thats how the system works. If something is incorrect, its up to you to let them know. 

Cell phone numbers are different.  And thats changing. Eventually the landline will disappear completely. Then they won't be *different*. reference: Just look around. CRAs know one has to have prior express consent to robo call.  They could assume that the data furnisher had pec, but even that would be an assumption.  Clearly, however, they could not even assume that everyone else had pec but that's what they are doing when they publish cell phone numbers. It's unlawful to robo-call cell phones. Its unreasonable for the CRA's to assume that all CA's will violate the law. This is just common sense.

I have not found any reference which is dispositive.  If any of you guys have anything which supports your opinion then I'd like to take a look at it.

---

---

[Downto0]

More huffing and puffing.

In addition to your argument being conclusory and circular, it is a red herring.

Show me a reference which give the CRAs carte blanche to publish any piece of private personal information the data furnisher sends them with no regard to the content.

Facta specifically states that the CRAs must follow guidelines to vet data.

SEC. 312. PROCEDURES TO ENHANCE THE ACCURACY AND INTEGRITY OF
INFORMATION FURNISHED TO CONSUMER REPORTING AGENCIES.

``(1) Guidelines.--The Federal banking agencies, the
National Credit Union Administration, and the Commission shall,
with respect to the entities that are subject to their

respective enforcement authority under section 621, and in
coordination as described in paragraph (2)--

``(A) establish and maintain guidelines for use by
each person that furnishes information to a consumer
reporting agency regarding the accuracy and integrity of
the information relating to consumers that such entities
furnish toconsumer reporting agencies, and update such guidelines
as often as necessary; and

``(B) prescribe regulations requiring each person
that furnishes information to a consumer reporting
agency to establish reasonable policies and procedures
for implementing the guidelines established pursuant to
subparagraph (A).

``(2) Coordination.--Each agency required to prescribe
regulations under paragraph (1) shall consult and coordinate
with each other such agency so that, to the extent possible, the
regulations prescribed by each such entity are consistent and
comparable with the regulations prescribed by each other such
agency.

``(3) Criteria.--In developing the guidelines required by
paragraph (1)(A), the agencies described in paragraph (1)
shall--

``(A) identify patterns, practices, and specific
forms of activity that can compromise the accuracy and
integrity of information furnished to consumer reporting
agencies;

``(B) review the methods (including technological
means) used to furnish information relating to consumers
to consumer reporting agencies;

``(C) determine whether persons that furnish
information to consumer reporting agencies maintain and
enforce policies to assure the accuracy and integrity of
information furnished to consumer reporting agencies;
and

``(D) examine the policies and processes that
persons that furnish information to consumer reporting
agencies employ to conduct reinvestigations and correct
inaccurate information relating to consumers that has
been furnished to consumer reporting agencies.''.

After reading this I would say that CRAs cannot simply list any information on consumer crs without vetting.  I guess I will be sending a letter to TU and EX for the procedures they follow to ascertain that information furnished by data furnishers is accurate and has integrity.

[gdale6]