Permissible Purpose?

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:
Ignore me. I should learn to read better.Lol

---

Lol. No worries, thanks for chiming in though

[Anonymous]

As I had time to more fully read the FCRA, it looks like when it mentions title 18 and imprisonment, that's for criminal cases. I'm not 100% sure, but I think so.  I had quickly skimmed over the FCRA and must have misread it earlier. 

So, in other words, I would only be entitled to the willful noncompliance part where I could get actual damages or $1,000, which ever is greater if/when I file my civil case on them.

[Anonymous]

Just out of curiosity, was it a hard or soft pull?

Keep us informed what happens....

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Just out of curiosity, was it a hard or soft pull?

Keep us informed what happens....

---

I thought debt collectors weren't allowed to do hard pull?

It was a soft pull. They soft pulled me right after I applied to a new credit card. That's how I saw them.

[gdale6]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Just out of curiosity, was it a hard or soft pull?

Keep us informed what happens....

---

I thought debt collectors weren't allowed to do hard pull?

It was a soft pull. They soft pulled me right after I applied to a new credit card. That's how I saw them.

---

They can HP if they own or are collecting on behalf of someone else an unpaid debt. Continued multi HPs would not be kosher that is called "poisoning your report" but a single one certainly would be legal and they would have PP.

[OMW2_HighAcheiver]

Got it!