Am I Entitled to Anything?

[TryingVeryHard]

There were two HARD inquiries that appeared in my TRANSUNION before. They were deleted upon the request of the COLLECTORS. I threatened to sue them for violating FDCPA. They conceeded and paid me few hundred dollars and promise to delete the hard inquiries.

The Hard inquiries were indeed deleted. I believe, by May, June, and July there were no INQUIRY reported. All were deleted. However, just this NOV 2008, after being denied credit, I checked my TRANSUNION and surprised that the INQUIRIES were back. 

I called TRANSUNION and they apologized for what they called "error". They promised to delete it again and send me new and updated credit report on the mail. 

I explained to them that they have violated my right as afforded to me by the FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT. I explained that they should have notified me within 5 days that they put those inquiries back. 

Now that the damage has been done, am I entitled to anything? Should I just forgive and forget?

[Anonymous]

First of all, you can ask them to send (free of charge) updated copies of your credit reports to all those who had requested it in the last 6 months.

Other than that, you ought to demonstrate actual damages, as this sounds like negligent non-compiance rather than willful non-compliance.

§ 617. Civil liability for negligent noncompliance [15 U.S.C. § 1681o]

(a) In general. Any person who is negligent in failing to comply with any requirement

imposed under this title with respect to any consumer is liable to that consumer in an

amount equal to the sum of

(1) any actual damages sustained by the consumer as a result of the failure; and

(2) in the case of any successful action to enforce any liability under this section, the

costs of the action together with reasonable attorney's fees as determined by the court.

[Anonymous]

---

TryingVeryHard wrote:

I explained to them that they have violated my right as afforded to me by the FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT. I explained that they should have notified me within 5 days that they put those inquiries back. 

---

I would have to read the FCRA to make sure, but I believe the 5 day re-insertion notification rule only applies to information removed as a result of a dispute with the CRA.

It sounds as if the companies who placed the inquiries removed them theirselves, not that they were removed as a result of a dispute with the CRA directly.

I'd have to read over the FCRA again to be sure of what I stated above, but I am about to sign off. Check out the FCRA here.

[Anonymous]

What type of credit were you denied? They admitted to you that it was negligence on their part that the inquiries reappeared. You definitely have a civil case for negligence and can probably recover restitution damages. But you have to ask yourself: is it worth it? Unless you were denied a mortgage or something expensive like that, it's not going to be cost effective to sue transunion. Your best bet is to call up that creditor and explain the issue.

[Anonymous]

A lot would likely depend upon the reasons you were denied credit. Did it state that a reason for the denial was too many inquiries?

If it did, a judge may also look at whether that was the only reason listed or not.

If it wasn't, the judge may say "well, you were denied based on other reasons as well, so the inquiries alone didn't cause you to be denied".

And....technically TU is following FCRA. FCRA requires a record to be kept of anyone who receives a copy of your CR. Whether the creditor had PP or not, the fact remains that they DID get a copy of your report, something that can't be changed.

[Anonymous]

Sidewinder, keep in mind that one thing is to keep record of inquiries visible to others and one different thing is to keep a record of inquiries not visible to others.

If TU negligently made the inquiries visible to others AND the consumer faced adverse action because of this, TU IS liable.

[Anonymous]

The CRA makes the inquiries visible based on how the creditor codes it. If the creditor coded it as a "soft" and TU made it visible, yes TU is liable. If it was indeed a "hard" inquiry, TU displayed correctly.

[Anonymous]

i know you disagree, but it's illegal to show inquiries to other unless you applied for credit or insurance. If the inquirer recoded and TU messed up afterwards, TU IS liable.

[Anonymous]

---

demed wrote:
i know you disagree, but it's illegal to show inquiries to other unless you applied for credit or insurance. If the inquirer recoded and TU messed up afterwards, TU IS liable.

---

I agree with that.

But the question is did the CA recode the inquiry.

[Anonymous]

exactly, I'm not sure what "deleted upon the request of the COLLECTORS" means exactly - my guts tell me that they recoded, since it would be illegal to delete...

only the OP can tell us by reading a real report that includes the soft inquiries.