Cardmatch and Chase CSR - is it actually targeted/pre-qualified?

[JoeRockhead]

---

@barrymc0904 wrote:

---

@Jnbmom wrote:

---

@FireMedic1 wrote:

---

@barrymc0904 wrote:

---

@Sporky wrote:

Chase CSR started popping up on my Creditmatch profile recently. Does anyone know if this is an actual targeted offer from Chase or do I simply match their "credit profile". I have a 9.5 year old BK (did not include Chase) reporting and flawless credit beyond that with multiple $45k limit cards. Don't want to waste a HP if it's essentially meaningless. This is the first time in 10 years that it has showed up, though.

---

its illegal for a BK to report on your credit reports& multiple consumer rights were violated for that info to get published there. id take a look into how removing it, search googe/yt/instagram on the process.

chase is never a wasted HP imo if you're looking to start expanding your profile, since theyre 5/24 its necessary to know now or never if they're going to approve you. Opening a checking account with them then checking for 'offers' is one way to check.

id knock US bank, barclays, other sensitive lenders/CUs off the list as well while youre at it. only live once!

whats the worst that can happen this second time around, another bankruptcy? entire financial system is failling anyway

---

@barrymc0904 Huh?

"The Fair Credit Reporting Act is the law that controls credit reporting companies. The law states that credit reporting companies may not report a bankruptcy case on a person's credit report after ten years from the date the bankruptcy case is filed or discharged.
See 15 U.S.C. § 1681(c) (link is external)"

https://www.moeb.uscourts.gov/faq-credit-reporting-and-bankruptcy-court 

---

Exactly Lordy people will post anything ......

---

im not bored enough nor expert enough to defend this at any severe length and going to start posting datapoints or case law etc. but again, if youre actually curious, there's lots of info on this.

as i said in my reply above, theres a big diff between 'generally accepted practice' and whats proper. 

i know nothing and one thing that continually rings true in life and as Albert Einstein put it best: "The more I learn, the more I realize how much I don't know."

---

The generally accepted practice of reporting a BK on someone's credit reports isn't improper... It might be inconvenient, but its what is allowed by federal law, just like the law also states it can't be reported past 10 years... no one needs to google anything other than what the FCRA states, and that's pretty well understood to many here.

[barrymc0904]

---

@FireMedic1 wrote:

@barrymc0904 

Essentially, there are only two circumstances under which you can remove a bankruptcy record from your credit report:

The bankruptcy information is incorrect (i.e., mistaken identity, already discharged, etc.); or

The bankruptcy is old enough to be removed

Those YT, Instgram and other places are just bunk. Especially YT.

---

sure but a platform in itself is not a specific 'source' of info.. if thats what youre implying? if so, of course both of those platforms fall under the same macro source as this forum.. 'derived from the internet.' Which is arguably the most accessible and greatest source of info to ever exist.

granted, there is obv no end to the brainrot completely incorrect info on those sites, as they are not closely moderated -- agreed. wouldn't say that has a zero sum outcome regarding 'all infos validity' on any one topic. google is a search index of the entire clearnet. not really sure what you're implying tbh.

But a blacks law dictionary is where i'd start if you'd want to being to even have a basic understanding of the actual definitions of the everday terms used both here and more importantly in the US codes. 

Again, i know nothing and im young enough& seen behind the curtains enough to make a generally active effort to never fix a bias to anything 'i think i know.'

As i stated above, Albert Einstein put it best in famously stating "The more I learn, the more I realize how much I don't know.’ And surely you dont want to argue with Mr. Einstein?

[FireMedic1]

Sorry @Sporky to get off your content. I'm just as guilty. JMO. Wait till the BK is long gone. Then apply. Back on topic.

[barrymc0904]

---

@JoeRockhead wrote:

---

@barrymc0904 wrote:

---

@Jnbmom wrote:

---

@FireMedic1 wrote:

---

@barrymc0904 wrote:

---

@Sporky wrote:

Chase CSR started popping up on my Creditmatch profile recently. Does anyone know if this is an actual targeted offer from Chase or do I simply match their "credit profile". I have a 9.5 year old BK (did not include Chase) reporting and flawless credit beyond that with multiple $45k limit cards. Don't want to waste a HP if it's essentially meaningless. This is the first time in 10 years that it has showed up, though.

---

its illegal for a BK to report on your credit reports& multiple consumer rights were violated for that info to get published there. id take a look into how removing it, search googe/yt/instagram on the process.

chase is never a wasted HP imo if you're looking to start expanding your profile, since theyre 5/24 its necessary to know now or never if they're going to approve you. Opening a checking account with them then checking for 'offers' is one way to check.

id knock US bank, barclays, other sensitive lenders/CUs off the list as well while youre at it. only live once!

whats the worst that can happen this second time around, another bankruptcy? entire financial system is failling anyway

---

@barrymc0904 Huh?

"The Fair Credit Reporting Act is the law that controls credit reporting companies. The law states that credit reporting companies may not report a bankruptcy case on a person's credit report after ten years from the date the bankruptcy case is filed or discharged.
See 15 U.S.C. § 1681(c) (link is external)"

https://www.moeb.uscourts.gov/faq-credit-reporting-and-bankruptcy-court 

---

Exactly Lordy people will post anything ......

---

im not bored enough nor expert enough to defend this at any severe length and going to start posting datapoints or case law etc. but again, if youre actually curious, there's lots of info on this.

as i said in my reply above, theres a big diff between 'generally accepted practice' and whats proper. 

i know nothing and one thing that continually rings true in life and as Albert Einstein put it best: "The more I learn, the more I realize how much I don't know."

---

The generally accepted practice of reporting a BK on someone's credit reports isn't improper... It might be inconvenient, but its what is allowed by federal law, just like the law also states it can't be reported past 10 years... no one needs to google anything other than what the FCRA states, and that's pretty well understood to many here.

---

ive gone very deep on topics relevant to this with some of the most esteemed financial lawyers in the country whom represent substantial interests far beyond defending some forum argument.

if you're not open to the possibility of something you seem so sure of potentially being wrong and are unwilling to research more to potentially prove yourself wrong, then obviously that sentiment prevails here.

As I said before, if you were actually curious, I'm sure you'd look. Its definitely more convinient to just assume what every else is doing or 'is generally accepted' is 'proper.'

Endless examples in history that negate this sentiment imo, but we might just have diff educations and experiences in life -- and thats okay!

I know nothing. Maybe you know everything.. who am I to tell you otherwise? : )

[Jnbmom]

@barrymc0904 

We need to stick to the topic posted by the OP.

[barrymc0904]

---

@Jnbmom wrote:

@barrymc0904 

We need to stick to the topic posted by the OP.

---

word. i was on topic though. he asked if should app with a BK. i made a joke a second bk is the worst possible outcome if he overextended himself again.

then stated the very real fact that many people have found bk reported to a CR is technically improper and are getting it removed. not one reply to me directly answering his other inquries in the OP.

why a mere unprofessional opinion stated in reply to something on topic is so triggering to these other members is beyond me. actually, i know why its invoking feelings, but i ended the convo multiple times and not sure why theyre sentiment takes precedence over mine.

off to carbone i go anyway. gnight fellas!

[Anonymous]

---

@barrymc0904 wrote:

---

---

ive gone very deep on topics relevant to this with some of the most esteemed financial lawyers in the country whom represent substantial interests far beyond defending some forum argument.

if you're not open to the possibility of something you seem so sure of potentially being wrong and are unwilling to research more to potentially prove yourself wrong, then obviously that sentiment prevails here.

---

Just a brief O/T continuation as a potential learning moment....

@barrymc0904 Do you realize how unconvincing this seems to be (even if it is true).   I mean last night I spoke to the founding fathers and they said the reporting BKs on credit reports was more or less exactly how they intended things to progress from the constitutional roots.  (They wish they had banned Youtube though).

Of course there is a possibility that something you are sure of is wrong, and such moments can be when great leaps in science/techology and art can take place.     But the great majority of the time, if many people believe something and have some evidence, such as a USC reference, it's much more likely to be mainly correct that mainly wrong.   Yes, when I get out of bed in the morning (if indeed it is really a bed and really a morning) I initially press lightly on the floor, because while it may appear to be solid, it may not be  etc.

Basically, you have to choose what you want to question, and that has a lot to do with the evidence you have for your belief.   The floor has always been solid, so maybe "tomorrow" "morning" I will take a chance!

[JoeRockhead]

---

---

ive gone very deep on topics relevant to this with some of the most esteemed financial lawyers in the country whom represent substantial interests far beyond defending some forum argument.

if you're not open to the possibility of something you seem so sure of potentially being wrong and are unwilling to research more to potentially prove yourself wrong, then obviously that sentiment prevails here.

As I said before, if you were actually curious, I'm sure you'd look. Its definitely more convinient to just assume what every else is doing or 'is generally accepted' is 'proper.'

Endless examples in history that negate this sentiment imo, but we might just have diff educations and experiences in life -- and thats okay!

I know nothing. Maybe you know everything.. who am I to tell you otherwise? : )

---

I believe you are simply mistaken. My reply was based on these silly things called facts and known federal law which governs credit reporting, as well as precedent. The only parts of your statements which hold any merit to BKs being improperly, or illegally reported lack quite a bit of context, either on purpose to stir debate, or simply a lack of knowledge. The ONLY type of BK which can be challenged as being technically improperly reported (other than if the information is incorrect on a traditional BK) and likely to be easily removed from a person's file would be in the case of someone (a creditor) improperly filing an Involuntary Bankruptcy against another party (debtor) which had no legal basis to do so.

I'm always open to learning new things. If you have "endless examples" to the contrary, by all means please start a new thread in the Bankruptcy Section and share these with everyone as I'm sure it would generate a lot of interest if it proves to be the truth based on facts, not to mention advantageous to a great number of people. People are here (maybe even brought here via a google search) looking for advice and realistic answers based on real life examples on a variety of subjects relating to credit, including what are many times unfortunate circumstances they've found themselves in (especially where the subject of BK is concerned). They're not looking for your, or my mere opinion, AKA conjecture. A good example: Many "gurus" of YouTube with their "tricks", and "hacks" mostly prey on people, and most likely are counting on those looking for that mystical, magic answer they so desperately seek (which often times simply don't exist). In stark contrast to the content here, all they are doing is in the name of generating views for their content and potential monetary gain.

Here, there is no reward for creating content or views (other than the warm fuzzy feeling it may bring to have helped someone). People are here to share their real life experiences, known facts and applicable laws. In the end for nothing more than to help others who find themselves in similar situations. When someone comes along with what appears to be nothing more than misinformation, or is viewed as simply bad advice, it gets challenged. 

[Horseshoez]

Having reviewed the ill advised posts by @barrymc0904, my "ChatGPT" sense is triggering;

[barrymc0904]

@Anonymous @JoeRockhead 

hola

Sure, there's lots of false info on YT regarding UCC and credit in general, agreed. Also, much of the 'generally accepted business practices' deployed by credit furnishers can be successfully challenged -- which is a very vauge statment and of course depends on a specific scenario. The assumption that anyone who comes onto myfico with info which does not meet years long confirmation bias is automatically 'incorrect' or 'being malicious' or 'obtained via YT scammers' is unfortunate, but to be expexted, as I've clocked hundreds of hours over the past ten years in the forums thus understand the general sentiment here.

But, tbh it doesn't take much to get many items removed from ones credit profile wiped without doing anything immoral nor illegal etc and I've witnessed it many times first hand. I've seen info deployed both from here and 'YT' to successfully raise credit scores of friends or family 100+ points in a few weeks. The credit reporting agencies are merely private for profit companies and the only actual 'credit burea' would be the CFB. The big three are coming under tons of public scrunity for their business practices& mishandling of reporting, consumer data, etc and are merely reporting whats being reported to them by furnishers. Then, many of those furnishers are way out of bounds in their practices in providing said info (collection agencies etc) and such can be challenged.

And you're right, my statements were very much vague and lacking context, as I was not posting a 'how to guide' on how to remove a bankruptcy for others to follow and such a path should be taken indivdually probably while consulting an attorney.  I personally have never done this as I've never faced bankruptcy.

But, I have successfully deployed many other tactics otherwise to improve my credit profile that if I were to post onto this forum I know for a fact would be similarily ridiculed -- as again, the confirmation bias and moderating here is very real (agreed, for a good reason). Several outside forums have been created solely due to these facts and discouraging others to obtain info outside this forum is kinda weird asf ngl lol.

Tbh dont even remember what the original comment i was replying to was, but i have provided some good info in other posts in the short time ive possesed this account, since it seems ur judging me.

To end this back& forth and in the name of providing more useful content heres some more random info off top of my head someone new might find of use:

-Rental Kharma is the only legal backdateable primary TL avails rn. Backdate up to 10yrs (TU/EQ only)with simple phone confirmation.

-Banks will lend off AU inflated scores dont listen otherwise esp when paired w tradelines listed here.

-SSFCU has a hidden TL.

-Intrigue Jewelers has a $10k primary TL that is reporting to all three CRAs right now. (yes it cost money& might stop reporting)

-BOA has great biz auto product up to four approvals $100k each 100% LTV off one pull (EX personal) no docs likely w 680-700+.

-You are a sole prop, run all your deposits first through sole prop biz accnts& get biz lending products with that EIN/history.

-A collection agency has to be licensed to do business in your state to attempt collections against you. 

Ok, I'm getting off now, you guys can stop bullying me dont make me go fully autistic on you!! God bless.

-Barry