Is there a FCRA violation from a CA doing a hard pull on my credit?

[Anonymous]

Got a letter from TU 2days ago regarding an inquiry that I have from my report.  It was a hard pull from a CA I have an adverse account with.  Do they have permissible purpose re: this basis?

TU letter states permissible purposes are credit transactions, employment consideration, review or collection of an existing account or other legitimate business need, insurance underwriting, government licensing, rental dwelling, or pursuant to a court order.  It also stated that written authorization may not be required to constitute permissible purpose, nor specific consent to the release of credit information is not necessary for a permissible purpose to exist. 

I am just confused now.   

[heirophant]

Only if it is credit related.  Medical collections or unavoidable expenses where you did not apply for credit do not apply.  Employment is permissible and courts.  Most of the time, insurance does a soft pull as well as bank accounts, but not always.  On these, I would assume since they are not an application for credit, it would not apply, but TU seems to disagree.  I'm sure others can chime in.

Message Edited by heirophant on 04-30-2008 04:20 PM

[Anonymous]

The question of CA having permissible purpose is an area of friendly disagreement on this board. Some say yes while others say no way.

I am in the middle and just can not decide. You can read the FCRA and make an educated guess.

I have had hard pulls when it is not related to credit. For instance, collection for towing a vehicle.

[Anonymous]

Does this mean that anyone can look at your credit profile, unless you place a fraud alert in it?  I have very, very low scores and with this happening, I don't think I'd be able to recover.  One too many inquiries will hit me.  I have some too with EX and EQ and I just started disputing with TU because it was very recent, just last month.  

Message Edited by workmywayup on 04-30-2008 05:20 PM

[Anonymous]

A fraud alert will not stop anyone from placing a hard pull on your reports. If you freeze your reports, then it *should*.

[Anonymous]

And I too am also in the middle with CA's having PP. I can understand if you have an account they are collecting on. If there is no account and they are merely fishing, I say no way.

[Anonymous]

But most of my inquries from creditors before are soft pulls.  This is the 1st one this year of this nature.

Message Edited by workmywayup on 04-30-2008 05:50 PM

Message Edited by workmywayup on 04-30-2008 05:52 PM

[Anonymous]

I wouldn't be too worried about 1 inquiry. It appears to be legit in this instance.

[fused]

---

workmywayup wrote:

Got a letter from TU 2days ago regarding an inquiry that I have from my report.  It was a hard pull from a CA I have an adverse account with.  Do they have permissible purpose re: this basis?

TU letter states permissible purposes are credit transactions, employment consideration, review or collection of an existing account or other legitimate business need, insurance underwriting, government licensing, rental dwelling, or pursuant to a court order.  It also stated that written authorization may not be required to constitute permissible purpose, nor specific consent to the release of credit information is not necessary for a permissible purpose to exist. 

I am just confused now.   

---

Since you do have a collection on your reports with this CA, they do in fact have PP. If a CA is still trying to collect on debt that is past reporting SOL, then no they do not have PP.

[Anonymous]

If they are pulling repeatedly, I think you could argue that not all of the inquiries are permissible.  The FDCPA permits inquiries for account reviews.  How many times do you need to review the account -- especially if there is no activity on the account and they know where you live?