Dealing with a CA that monitors my CR with soft pulls

[Anonymous]

I have some CC debts from BofA, Citi and Discover that are past the SOL. They happened when I was 19 about 10 years ago and have long dropped off my CRs. I'm sure they've been passed around from CA to CA for that long as I never responded to any dunning letters sent to me during that time. I recently started repairing my credit so I pulled all 3 of my reports and noticed that I have two soft pulls from Pinnacle on my Exp who I know now is a notorious CA. I have also matched them up with some of the dunning letters because it mentioned those specific debts. I've even got a letter from them as recently as three months ago due to a stupid mistake of changing my address at the post office.

They haven't inserted any negative tradelines, but from my understanding from reading the forums is that they are waiting for me to try and purchase a house so they can insert one then and screw up my CRs to force me to give them money. I could be wrong, but now it has me worried. What would you guys suggest I do now if anything at all? Thanks for the help!

[llecs]

If they are for sure from 10 years ago, then they legally cannot report. I'd ignore them. However, I'd also opt out with each of the CRAs. There's links aplenty in here somewhere. Opting out prevents the CRA from selling your info to a CA. Doing that might stop the soft pulls and would certainly prevent the CA from seeing any mortgage inquiries.

[Anonymous]

Thanks, I actually opted out permanentely yesterday, so looks like I'm on the right track!

[Anonymous]

---

@llecs wrote:
If they are for sure from 10 years ago, then they legally cannot report. I'd ignore them. However, I'd also opt out with each of the CRAs. There's links aplenty in here somewhere. Opting out prevents the CRA from selling your info to a CA. Doing that might stop the soft pulls and would certainly prevent the CA from seeing any mortgage inquiries.

---

I don't understand how opting out will help.

The CA is a creditor and has the right to AR until the debt is paid.  There's a difference between a pull for AR (account review) and a pull for PRM (promotional purposes) and my understanding is that opting out only prevents PRMs.

Hard inquiries are another story.

[Anonymous]

---

@llecs wrote:
If they are for sure from 10 years ago, then they legally cannot report. I'd ignore them. However, I'd also opt out with each of the CRAs. There's links aplenty in here somewhere. Opting out prevents the CRA from selling your info to a CA. Doing that might stop the soft pulls and would certainly prevent the CA from seeing any mortgage inquiries.

---

Jaystay,

i wouldn't do that if i were u...i had a sears card back in 1990, it was on my credit then fall of like your situation, next thing i know police was knocking at my door, this was in jan. 2009, serving me papers...thats right papers sear was suing me....i had to pay $330 a month. i just paid them of in oct of 2009.Thank god......

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@llecs wrote:
If they are for sure from 10 years ago, then they legally cannot report. I'd ignore them. However, I'd also opt out with each of the CRAs. There's links aplenty in here somewhere. Opting out prevents the CRA from selling your info to a CA. Doing that might stop the soft pulls and would certainly prevent the CA from seeing any mortgage inquiries.

---

Jaystay,

i wouldn't do that if i were u...i had a sears card back in 1990, it was on my credit then fall of like your situation, next thing i know police was knocking at my door, this was in jan. 2009, serving me papers...thats right papers sear was suing me....i had to pay $330 a month. i just paid them of in oct of 2009.Thank god......

---

It depends on the statute of limitations in your state and whether or not you raise that defense at the initial court hearing. 

[RobertEG]

What the CRA can report as a result of any inquiry is the real issue here, and not what anyone can request from them

There is a whole lot of dispute of what is and is not a permissable pull of your credit report by a CA under FCRA 604. But I dont think that is your real issue now.

The issue now is what your CR can contain.

The FCRA is very specific.  No CRA can include in any credit report they issue, permissable inquiry or not, any prior monthly account delinquency with an original creditor that has exceeded 7 years from its indivual monthly date of delinquency,  FCRA 605(a)(5).   Also, no CRA may include in any credit report they issue the prior reporting of any charge off or collection against the original credit account once 7 1/2 years has expiired from the date of first delinquency on the origianl creditor account (DOFD).  FCRA 605(c).

It doesnt matter one whit how the CAs may have passed this account around.  The DOFD is a date certain under FCRA 605(c) that makes them irrelevant, and prevents any CRA inclusion in an CR they issue of these derogs.

If it was ten years ago, just hang up on them of they call, and never respond to them in any way.  They are dust in the wind.

Message Edited by RobertEG on 01-08-2010 12:36 AM

[Anonymous]

Thanks, the SOL in CA where I live is 4 years so this is way beyond that. They haven't made any hard pulls, just two soft pulls last year with a 6 month span in between.

Also, in ladydi's case, doesn't Sears sell the debt to the CA which then gets passed around? If so how come Sears came after her with a suit so many years later?

So say one day they see I'm trying to make a large purchase and slip these past debts into my CR, should I DV Pinnacle, dispute with the CRA or must I handle it in a different way?

Message Edited by jaystay on 01-08-2010 08:39 AM

[Jazzzy]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Thanks, the SOL in CA where I live is 4 years so this is way beyond that. They haven't made any hard pulls, just two soft pulls last year with a 6 month span in between.

Also, in ladydi's case, doesn't Sears sell the debt to the CA which then gets passed around? If so how come Sears came after her with a suit so many years later?

So say one day they see I'm trying to make a large purchase and slip these past debts into my CR, should I DV Pinnacle, dispute with the CRA or must I handle it in a different way?

---

This is a common misunderstanding about statute of limitations (SOL). They can still sue you. They can win if you don't go to court and fight it. You have to go and tell the court that they are past the statute of limitations.

Also, they can still try to collect until the cows come home.

[MattH]

---

@LynetteM wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Thanks, the SOL in CA where I live is 4 years so this is way beyond that. They haven't made any hard pulls, just two soft pulls last year with a 6 month span in between.

Also, in ladydi's case, doesn't Sears sell the debt to the CA which then gets passed around? If so how come Sears came after her with a suit so many years later?

So say one day they see I'm trying to make a large purchase and slip these past debts into my CR, should I DV Pinnacle, dispute with the CRA or must I handle it in a different way?

---

This is a common misunderstanding about statute of limitations (SOL). They can still sue you. They can win if you don't go to court and fight it. You have to go and tell the court that they are past the statute of limitations.

Also, they can still try to collect until the cows come home.

---

The legality of suing beyond SOL varies from State to State.  In some States collectors can get in big trouble for knowingly filing suit beyond SOL, in other States they can always file suit and hope to get a default judgment when the creditor fails to appear in court.  There was a big scandal last year when New York State authorities caught a process service outfit fraudulently claiming to have served notice on people who then did not come to court because they had not in fact been served, so the creditors got default judgments.  I would imagine those default judgments have been vacated after it became clear that process had not in fact been served!