topic Re: Disputing and Ethics in General Credit Topics

Disputing and Ethics

Tuscani — Tue, 26 Jun 2007 23:43:31 GMT

The ethics involved with disputing items on your credit report is a hot topic. I have seen many different opinions on this and would like to share my thoughts.

Is it ethical for someone to report 1 or 2 late payments for 7 years? Sure, it's legal, but

is it ethical for them to continue to hamper your efforts to improve your life and learn

from past mistakes? Only you can decide...no one else.

CRAs have to be able to verify it by the original records to report it and if they can't,

then they can't report it. Disputing is the avenue afforded us to request verification. You

are simply asking them to check their records to confirm.

IMO, It doesn't matter one bit what we know or don't know. We aren't reporting anything. The

law is clear that if the CRA is to report an account, they must be able to verify it with

the furnisher (among other things). If the account, lates, etc cannot be verified off it

goes. There is no section of the FCRA that states that a consumer's personal knowledge of an

account has any bearing on it's reporting or the CRA's requirement to verify. Doesn't

matter.

There is no ethical dilemma about disputing accounts that you personally know are reporting

correctly. What you know/don't know isn't relevant. (Try to have a non-reporting positive

account put ON your reports for an idea of how little what you know matters). All you are

doing is demanding the CRA prove that they can verify what they are reporting (no more, no

less).

Making false statements is another matter, saying "I was never late" when you in fact were

isn't appropriate nor is it necessary. Instead of claiming you were never late, insist the

CRA prove that the lates that they report are accurate. "Please provide evidence that this

information is accurate and belongs on my report" accomplishes the same thing as "I was

never late" without making any statements on your part.

Re: Disputing and Ethics

Anonymous — Tue, 26 Jun 2007 23:48:42 GMT

YEP!!! well said!

Re: Disputing and Ethics

Anonymous — Wed, 27 Jun 2007 00:12:21 GMT

totally agree.

Re: Disputing and Ethics

Anonymous — Wed, 27 Jun 2007 00:18:47 GMT

Gotta respectfully disagree with you here, Tusc. I could make a nice little legal argument that fully supports your position. But ethics are another story.

Let's say a piece of info is correct, e.g., you (colloquial "you") were 60 days late. Suppose you don't know whether or not it's correct. Or you believe it's incorrect. OK, go ahead and dispute it.

Now suppose that you know plain well that it is correct. You dispute it, but not because you have some noble intent to force the CRAs to do their job. We all have better ways to spend our time. Seriously. You dispute it because you're hoping you get lucky and they delete it. I think there's an ethical issue there.

You are arguing that your knowledge of the correctness of the item is irrelevant in this ethical dilemma. I think your knowledge and intent has everything to do with it. JMHO.

Re: Disputing and Ethics

Anonymous — Wed, 27 Jun 2007 00:23:44 GMT

so what you are saying ...as in most legal issues...its ones intent? that defines the ethics.

Re: Disputing and Ethics

Tuscani — Wed, 27 Jun 2007 00:41:21 GMT

masdeocho wrote:

Gotta respectfully disagree with you here, Tusc. I could make a nice little legal argument that fully supports your position. But ethics are another story.

Let's say a piece of info is correct, e.g., you (colloquial "you") were 60 days late. Suppose you don't know whether or not it's correct. Or you believe it's incorrect. OK, go ahead and dispute it.

Now suppose that you know plain well that it is correct. You dispute it, but not because you have some noble intent to force the CRAs to do their job. We all have better ways to spend our time. Seriously. You dispute it because you're hoping you get lucky and they delete it. I think there's an ethical issue there.

You are arguing that your knowledge of the correctness of the item is irrelevant in this ethical dilemma. I think your knowledge and intent has everything to do with it. JMHO.

I hear you. But I do feel that knowing is irrelevant. How do you know that my intentions are not strictly noble? And assuming they are, why shouldn't the CRAs delete! If my intentions are not noble, why should I scrutinize myself for the CRAs not doing their job to verify.

Nonetheless, I think we can all agree that there is quite the fine line between legality and ethics.

Re: Disputing and Ethics

Anonymous — Wed, 27 Jun 2007 00:48:19 GMT

Two cents:

I really don’t see an ethical issue for me anyway!!! If the credit card industry, CRA’s, CA’s, and OC’s can hold us to be sub-human on paper and hide under the cloak of the law for their profit and gain….Then so be it, I want to hold them to the same letter of the law.

And if by chance I have been resurrected to be human again by those actions. I’ll carry that burden…can’t be can’t be any worse then this one.

Re: Disputing and Ethics

Anonymous — Wed, 27 Jun 2007 01:24:23 GMT

hmmmm.

ethics

right v. wrong.

i deal with it daily.

suppose i have a client charged with stealing a pack of gum. and he is guilty. in fact, he has told me that he is guilty. the state has a duty to prove that he is guilty, and to do so in an ethical manner. my client also has a right to be defended, and for me to do so in an ethical manner. there is a set of legal guidelines (the constitution, state statutes, caselaw, rules of court) that the prosecutor and i must both follow. suppose the only evidence that the state has against my client is the item that he stole, which was found when the officer entered my client's home without a warrant (assume no exception to the warrant requirement applies). no eyewitnesses, no video recordings, no confessions. nada. is it ethical for me to move to suppress the pack of gum, the result of which would be a dismissal? of course. it would be unethical for me to not make such motion. it would be wrong for me to not hold the state to the legal standard that is placed upon it.

suppose i have a tl on my reports. and it is accurate. in fact, i am certain that it is accurate. the cra has the duty to show that it is accurate, and to do so in an ethical manner. i also have a right to dispute the tl, and to do so in an ethical manner. there is a set of legal guidelines that the cra and i must both follow. suppose the only evidence that the cra has of the account is the fact that it is was reported by the oc three years ago. suppose the oc is out of business, or the oc does not care to respond to the investigation, or suppose all records of my tl are lost or destroyed. is it ethical for me to ask for verification of the debt, the result of which could be a removal. of course. it would not be unethical of me to hold the cra to the legal standard that is placed upon it.

in both situations, holding the responsible party to its respective legal obligation is right. it is right because it tries to ensure that those individuals who are innocent, whether of a crime or of defaulting on a debt, are not summarily found guilty or penalized for something that they did not do. sure, a lot of criminals walk, and a lot of accurate tl's are deleted; but, abrogating the right of any citizen to hold any other entity to the letter of the law is wrong...or a better word might be unethical.

Re: Disputing and Ethics

Anonymous — Wed, 27 Jun 2007 01:27:06 GMT

Tuscani wrote:

masdeocho wrote:
Gotta respectfully disagree with you here, Tusc. I could make a nice little legal argument that fully supports your position. But ethics are another story.

Let's say a piece of info is correct, e.g., you (colloquial "you") were 60 days late. Suppose you don't know whether or not it's correct. Or you believe it's incorrect. OK, go ahead and dispute it.

Now suppose that you know plain well that it is correct. You dispute it, but not because you have some noble intent to force the CRAs to do their job. We all have better ways to spend our time. Seriously. You dispute it because you're hoping you get lucky and they delete it. I think there's an ethical issue there.

You are arguing that your knowledge of the correctness of the item is irrelevant in this ethical dilemma. I think your knowledge and intent has everything to do with it. JMHO.

I hear you. But I do feel that knowing is irrelevant. How do you know that my intentions are not strictly noble? And assuming they are, why shouldn't the CRAs delete! If my intentions are not noble, why should I scrutinize myself for the CRAs not doing their job to verify.
Nonetheless, I think we can all agree that there is quite the fine line between legality and ethics.

Tusc - I have never had any doubt that your intentions are always the noblest.

Re: Disputing and Ethics

Anonymous — Wed, 27 Jun 2007 01:31:21 GMT

Hey didn't I just say that........You said it much better...I applaud you!!!

Re: Disputing and Ethics

Anonymous — Wed, 27 Jun 2007 01:34:57 GMT

confused, i was typing it and naturally had to stop to go check tc and then came back to finish. i didnt see your post. you said it much more succinctly (sp?) than i did.

Re: Disputing and Ethics

Anonymous — Wed, 27 Jun 2007 01:38:41 GMT

hey, its all good we are on the same page!

Re: Disputing and Ethics

fused — Wed, 27 Jun 2007 01:53:33 GMT

_________________________________________________________________________

Tuscani wrote:

There is no ethical dilemma about disputing accounts that you personally know are reporting

correctly. What you know/don't know isn't relevant. (Try to have a non-reporting positive

account put ON your reports for an idea of how little what you know matters). All you are

doing is demanding the CRA prove that they can verify what they are reporting (no more, no

less).

__________________________________________________________________________

I think it's an interesting post and must say I do agree with much of what you said, but I am a little surprised the FICO admin has not chimed in. Tuscani, this is what I got out of your inital post. An example here not a true event or story. I pulled my three CRs and noticed 15 inqs on them mostly from recent CC apps. Knowing this is hurting my score, I dispute all of them with the CRAs as not mine or inaccurate while knowing full well they are mine and they are reporting accurately. I am a little surprised, you commonly state in your posts that you should not dispute accurate information in your credit reports. Has something changed. I have read countless threads and posts at other forums where they take credit repair to notches unknown, employing ruthless guerilla tactics on creditors.

Message Edited by fused111 on 06-26-2007 03:53 PM

Re: Disputing and Ethics

Anonymous — Wed, 27 Jun 2007 01:55:24 GMT

This just happenend to me....

I sent a GW to AT&T re a 3 yo paid collection of $200. A nice lady called me up yesterday and said that since AT&T bought out the local phone company, my record of that Paid Collection had been purged from the system, it no longer exists. She said go ahead and dispute with the CRA's and when they can't confirm it will be deleted from my records. What a nice lady

It's my Paid Collection no doubt, but if I can get it off my report, I'm gettin it off. And won't lose a bit of sleep over. Keep in mind that I did pay a price for that collection. Higher Interest rates, etc. But to get an early break on it is no problem as far I'm concerned.

Hey, murderers get 20y.o. sentances and get out after 5 for good behavior. I've been good too.

Live Long and Prosper,

ctRob

Message Edited by ctrob on 06-26-2007 06:55 PM

Re: Disputing and Ethics

Anonymous — Wed, 27 Jun 2007 02:16:46 GMT

Nice post.

I know I have walked the line on some of my disputes.

I am also glad the Myfico has a good set of TOS that keeps the forum clean of unethical techniques.

Re: Disputing and Ethics

Tuscani — Wed, 27 Jun 2007 02:40:17 GMT

masdeocho wrote:

Tuscani wrote:

masdeocho wrote:

Gotta respectfully disagree with you here, Tusc. I could make a nice little legal argument that fully supports your position. But ethics are another story.

Let's say a piece of info is correct, e.g., you (colloquial "you") were 60 days late. Suppose you don't know whether or not it's correct. Or you believe it's incorrect. OK, go ahead and dispute it.

Now suppose that you know plain well that it is correct. You dispute it, but not because you have some noble intent to force the CRAs to do their job. We all have better ways to spend our time. Seriously. You dispute it because you're hoping you get lucky and they delete it. I think there's an ethical issue there.

You are arguing that your knowledge of the correctness of the item is irrelevant in this ethical dilemma. I think your knowledge and intent has everything to do with it. JMHO.

I hear you. But I do feel that knowing is irrelevant. How do you know that my intentions are not strictly noble? And assuming they are, why shouldn't the CRAs delete! If my intentions are not noble, why should I scrutinize myself for the CRAs not doing their job to verify.

Nonetheless, I think we can all agree that there is quite the fine line between legality and ethics.

Tusc - I have never had any doubt that your intentions are always the noblest.

Perhaps you should. HEHE

Re: Disputing and Ethics

smallfry — Wed, 27 Jun 2007 02:42:33 GMT

I see you answered in the time it took me to type and delete my post.

Re: Disputing and Ethics

Tuscani — Wed, 27 Jun 2007 02:46:15 GMT

fused111 wrote:

_________________________________________________________________________

Tuscani wrote:

There is no ethical dilemma about disputing accounts that you personally know are reporting

correctly. What you know/don't know isn't relevant. (Try to have a non-reporting positive

account put ON your reports for an idea of how little what you know matters). All you are

doing is demanding the CRA prove that they can verify what they are reporting (no more, no

less).

__________________________________________________________________________

I think it's an interesting post and must say I do agree with much of what you said, but I am a little surprised the FICO admin has not chimed in. Tuscani, this is what I got out of your inital post. An example here not a true event or story. I pulled my three CRs and noticed 15 inqs on them mostly from recent CC apps. Knowing this is hurting my score, I dispute all of them with the CRAs as not mine or inaccurate while knowing full well they are mine and they are reporting accurately. I am a little surprised, you commonly state in your posts that you should not dispute accurate information in your credit reports. Has something changed. I have read countless threads and posts at other forums where they take credit repair to notches unknown, employing ruthless guerilla tactics on creditors.

Message Edited by fused111 on 06-26-2007 03:53 PM

I wouldn't say things have changed.. While we do technically frown upon disputing accurate items, whether or not you want to challenge the system based upon your ethical standards is up to you. No one here can tell you what you can and can't do, and disputing is not illegal.

Re: Disputing and Ethics

Anonymous — Wed, 27 Jun 2007 03:37:15 GMT

OK, someone please let me know the next time this happens:

1. You find incorrect info on your report, but it is positive. For example a TL that isn't yours is in good standing and shows up, or a judgment that is yours but the amount owed is higher than what is displayed. Are you going to dispute it?

2. EX doesn't report 3 of your collections that TU correctly reports. Are you going to take EX to task because your report isn't correct and accurate?

Just gotta keep those CRAs in line, right?

Hey, you needed a Devil's Advocate on this one ...

Re: Disputing and Ethics

Anonymous — Wed, 27 Jun 2007 03:52:56 GMT

A TL that was not mine helped me get my first mortgage in 1999. I was never asked about it - never answered.

All I can say is disputing accurate information can be bad as they can find a late that was not reported or they change it to a more recent date.

This is a game - a very serious one at that.

masdeocho wrote:
OK, someone please let me know the next time this happens:

1. You find incorrect info on your report, but it is positive. For example a TL that isn't yours is in good standing and shows up, or a judgment that is yours but the amount owed is higher than what is displayed. Are you going to dispute it?

2. EX doesn't report 3 of your collections that TU correctly reports. Are you going to take EX to task because your report isn't correct and accurate?

Just gotta keep those CRAs in line, right?

Hey, you needed a Devil's Advocate on this one ...