Hard Inquiry TransUnion without consent

[Anonymous]

After rebuilding for two years and in the garden - no hard inquiries since August 2012 - today logged into TrueCredit lost points new inquiry yesterday Integrity Solution Services did a hard pull with my first name wrong last name but an old address from 15 years ago. I am being told by Transunion that I can't dispute an inquiry AND the only way it will be removed is if I get that company to write a letter saying they didn't have my permission to pull it which they did not have.

From the website it's a collection agency of some sort... Any such debts that may be lurking are from 18 years ago but they have had no contact with me at all. Is it true that I have no recourse other than a fraud alert?? Transunion stated I needed a police report which I got but it doesn't remove anything. I had planned on buying a house this summer which is why no inquiries last nine months!! Any advice or should this be in another topic?

[RobertEG]

If they have legitimate collection authority, which I presume is so, they have permissible purpose to make inquiry for a consumer's credit report.

The entire purpose of defining permissible purposes under FCRA 604 is to identify those types of inquiries that do NOT require specific permission from the consumer.

Otherwise, the credit industry would come to a crawl.

It could be argued that inquiries by debt collectors must be excluded from credit reports made avaliable to others once the CR exclusion period has expired, but that is not based, as of yet, on any statutory or case law provision.  The FCRA, except for credit or insurance transactions not initiated by a consumer, does not regulate coding as so-called "hard" or "soft" inquiries.

[Anonymous]

So in this instance if it indeed a debt from my marriage 20 years ago or not even my debt but either way that I have not been informed of in the last 15 - 20 years but a collection company can do a hard pull gather all information on me without my knowledge or my permission and try to engage me even tell Transunion that they did have my consent and this is legal. It feel like a violation and means since I can't explain this inquiry to a mortgage company or bank unless I engage them and reset some clock on SOL I won't be able buy a house after all this work. It dropped my credit score 20 points and is a fresh inquiry.

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:
So in this instance if it indeed a debt from my marriage 20 years ago or not even my debt but either way that I have not been informed of in the last 15 - 20 years but a collection company can do a hard pull gather all information on me without my knowledge or my permission and try to engage me even tell Transunion that they did have my consent and this is legal. It feel like a violation and means since I can't explain this inquiry to a mortgage company or bank unless I engage them and reset some clock on SOL I won't be able buy a house after all this work. It dropped my credit score 20 points and is a fresh inquiry.

---

They don't need your permission if it is in the process of collecting a debt.  They have PP based on the collection of a debt alone.

Even if you did call them nothing will be restarted.  Just calling them, in any state, will not restart the SOL. That would take a payment or a new promise to pay in writing depending on your state.

[RobertEG]

You are absolutely correct in stating that credit inquiries by a debt collector can alone raise a red flag with a prospective creditor.

It can raise the question..."if you  have no unpaid, delinquent debt, then  why is a debt collector pulling your CR for the purpose of collecting a delinquent debt?"

And you stand there, making denial of the debt.........

If you legitimately dont owe the debt, and the debt collector made improper pull without permissible purpose of having legitimate collection authority on the debt (as some JBDs have been known to do), you have no answer to provide other than a simple assertion to the prospective creditor that you dont owe any debt to that debt collector.

It could be a real catch-22, taking months and months to contest though the normal DV/dispute processes mill. 

A very legitimate reason for a consumer to dispute a credit inquiry, thus making the CRA statement that they wont as policy reinvestigate any disputes related to credit inquiries a gross violation of your rights.  I would submit that, at a minimum, the CRA would be required to provide a copy of their statement of permissible purpose to at least show they provided one, and giving you some basis to challenge their stated permissible purpose. 

Most consumer disputes relating to credit inquiries can usually be dismiised readily by a CRA, as the real basis for disputing the posting of a credit inquiry is usually that the party did not have permissible purpose.  However, again, a catch-22 for the consumer.  Since only the CRA has in their files the statement of permissible purpose provided by the party, the consumer is only guessing when filing a dispute as to the accuracy of any stated permissible purpose, as they dont even have a copy to challenge on the merits.  A solid dispute could be buttressed by first sendng the CRA an info requirement under section 609(a)(1) demanding a copy of their statement of permissible purpose, and thus getting the facts, but that takes time. By the time all of the processes are run to gather info to challenge a dispute, it is usually too late to undo the damage.

Additionally, if an inquiry is posted to your credit report made by a debt collector, and their collection has already been excluded from your CR due to expiration of its credit report exclsion period, that is tantamount to reporting their collection activity.  Since section 605(a) bars the CRA from including information pertaining to a collection in a consumer's credit report after expiration of the CR exclusion period, a good case could be made that even though they may have had permissible purpose, and they the debt collector can receive the requested CR, the CRA is nonethless barred from including any record of that inquiry in credit reports provided to others.  Stated simply, it should not be coded as a so-called "hard" inquiry.

I dont have specific answers other than I see legitimate reason to either dispute with the CRA as lacking permissible purpose, or to contest that they have violated their CR exclusion requirement under section 605(a)(4) by posting the collection information to your CR.  But that again wont address any current need for quick resolution  if in a mortgage app process.

A nasty dilemma.

[johnnypinaz]

I just posted almost the same thing so I wanted to jump in here. I was victim of ID theft and have nearly 17 inquiries within3-4 months. Transunion told me same thing.. must have letter from company to authorize removal.

I believe this is maybe a new policy for them because I contacted the companies and they dont have a clue what Im talking about. They said they dont have a process to have them removed and to dispute it and it will come off. They even agreed they arent mine but just couldnt help.

So were screwed basically.

I dont know if alot of others are running into this but I have a feelig were going to start seeing more of it.

[johnnypinaz]

I am not good at writing up pro looking stuff, but would someone maybe like to help compose a letter we can send them and make it look really serious? I personally would be so thankful for this. I have a really clean credit report and 17 inquiries on TU. Of and EQ and EX I have 740+ scores. Transunion is 602 and the simulator says this will take it over 700 if these are removed.

[RobertEG]

If you assert that you have been the victim of possible identity theft, obtain a copy of a police report (whch the FCRA calls an "identity theft report"), and file that report with the CRA, they are REQUIRED, under the provisions of FCRA 605B, to block that information from inclusion in any credit report they issue to others.

"Any information" is hardly ambiguous, and does not exclude credit inquires.

Refusal to do so is a violation of statute, for which I would file a complaint with the FTC, with a cc: to the CRA.  You could also, if so inclined, bring your own civil action against the CRA for violation of the statute.

"FCRA 605B.  Block of information resulting from identity theft

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, a consumer reporting agency shall block the reporting of any information in the file of the consumer that the consumer identifies as information that resulted from an alleged identity theft, not later than 4 business days after the date of receipt by such agency of -

(1) appropriate proof of the identity of the consumer;

(2) a copy of an identity theft report;

(3) the identification of such information by the consumer; and

(4) a statement by the consumer that the information is not information relating to any transaction authorized by the consumer."

[Anonymous]

Actually I was told by Transunion that it could not be done but I followed the process below faxed the police report to Tranunion requesting they confirm the company had my permission to access my full credit report which the company did not The hard inquiry has since been removed.

[Anonymous]

Sorry the process above.