cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Permissible Purpose

tag
Dawn
Established Contributor

Permissible Purpose

I would like to determine if I am missing something here.  I have not seen any past credit reports show inquiries that I thought were unusual.  However, I am now questioning the legitimacy of one that I noticed on my husband's report from August 2007.
 
For five years we have had home security alarm service set up through our installer.  We pay them a small fee for maintenance on our system in addition to the monitoring service fee, and our account with the monitoring service (Counterforce) is updated.
 
About a year ago, the installer started utilizing the billing services provided by Counterforce.  Somehow, the right hand did not know what the left had was doing and even though the installer's records indicated that we had paid, Counterforce continued to send out letters (on the installer's letterhead) asking for payment.  We finally got that cleared up and ceased to receive non-payment notices.
 
However, at that same time, an Account Review inquiry by Counterforce appeared on my husband's credit report.  Knowing that the installer had started using Counterforce's billing services, I assumed this was "normal."  Today, when I was talking to the installer about another issue, I asked about this and he was surprised to hear that Counterforce had made the inquiry.  He said that Counterforce does not own the accounts and he doesn't know why they made the inquiry.
 
If my original contract with the installer does not outline that any other parties might be involved in "reviewing" our credit, does Counterforce have a legitimate reason to do an "account review?"
 
This has made me uneasy in thinking that we are turning over the money for our monitoring service to the installer and are dependent upon them to pay our account at Counterforce.  I still don't have the complete details about how this arrangement works, other than being told that Counterforce does not "own" the accounts.
 
 
Message 1 of 4
3 REPLIES 3
fused
Moderator Emeritus

Re: Permissible Purpose



Dawn wrote:
 
If my original contract with the installer does not outline that any other parties might be involved in "reviewing" our credit, does Counterforce have a legitimate reason to do an "account review?"
 
I still don't have the complete details about how this arrangement works, other than being told that Counterforce does not "own" the accounts.

If the contract does not allow this, then Counterforce does not have PP. Granted this inq is year old and it's off (or soon to be) your hubby's report, you can still write a nasty non-PP letter to Counterforce.
Message 2 of 4
Anonymous
Not applicable

Re: Permissible Purpose

I agree with FUSED-

fused wrote:


Dawn wrote:
 
If my original contract with the installer does not outline that any other parties might be involved in "reviewing" our credit, does Counterforce have a legitimate reason to do an "account review?"
 
I still don't have the complete details about how this arrangement works, other than being told that Counterforce does not "own" the accounts.

If the contract does not allow this, then Counterforce does not have PP. Granted this inq is year old and it's off (or soon to be) your hubby's report, you can still write a nasty non-PP letter to Counterforce.



Message 3 of 4
Dawn
Established Contributor

Re: Permissible Purpose

Thanks ... I suspected as much, but it's always nice to hear it from someone else.
Message 4 of 4
Advertiser Disclosure: The offers that appear on this site are from third party advertisers from whom FICO receives compensation.