Newbie Question

[chane]

Originally Posted by 94B

They don't follow the law because consumers do not hold them accountable.

I agree. Without a law degree, how do we get people to do so?

The reason they can get by with it is because majority of the consumers don't know their rights let alone when their rights are being violated. And quite frankly don't care. Generally when things get settled outside of court is because CRA's do not want CL's established against them and for the consumers.

Again, I completely agree. It's less expensive for them to half ass the dispute process and then settle. The dispute process simply cuts into their profits. That's why they came up with the whole e-oscar system. They don't actually investigate like they're supposed.

Having paper trail(proof) doesn't always equate to litigation. Some times having paper trail will be enough for a consumer to reach someone at the top, who is in the position to do what is necessary that it doesn't reach the level of litigation. But without proof you really don't have much to go on.

In theory this is true and I would always suggest having a paper trail for numerous reasons. But, reaching someone at the top - I don't know about that. It would take hours of research and persistence or pure luck for that to happen.

Not sure how you came up with the statements above from my post alone. I never suggested that someone spew out empty threats of litigation or case laws. I made it clear in my post that if you intend to threaten legal action, make sure they follow through with it, otherwise utilize a different method.

I didn't come up with those statements from your post. Sorry for not making that clear.

I will leave your "fancy credit repair techniques that they learned online by these so called "credit repair experts" that are either outdated or simply unnecessary...and they simple don't work" comment alone since I have no idea what you are referring to.

Again, sorry for not making that clear. I wasn't referring to anything you said. I respect your opinion and I know that you know what you're talking about. We just differ on a few things - no big deal.

CRA's are NOT our(consumers)friends first and foremost. Their clientele includes OC/CA/JDB's.

Agree 100%.

Demanding?? Who said anything about that. I am of the opinion that if you have proof, it will go alot further in getting the results you want than a CRA vs Consumer situation(he said she said).

I don't know. It sounds good on paper...but how effective is it, really?

Here's an example of situation without any proof:

Consumer- Yes, hello....Its been over 30 days and I have not received the result of my disputes. My credit report number is XXXXXXXXXX.

CRA- We didn't receive your dispute, we have nothing in our file regarding your dispute.

Consumer- Well I sent it over 30 days ago.

CRA-Well we didn't get your request for an investigation, you might want to go check with your post office.There's nothing we can do.

Consumer- Umm, Umm well then you if you say so then it must be true. But I sent it, I really did. Oh well don't worry because being the nice consumer that I am, I will just send in another request for investigation after all I don't have any PROOF anyways.:rolleyes:

Either way it's not going to speed up the process. You'd have to send another dispute anyway. If they say they don't have it and you prove you sent it, it still doesn't prove that they intentionally lost it. Even if you could prove they threw it away...what are you going to do? Sue them?

I wish more people would sue them, but again...they don't. In fact, I am not a litigous person at all, but I wish EVERYONE would sue them. Their bullshit has to stop.

But, for now, that's why in my opinion, it's just not worth paying the extra money and spending the extra time on CM.

Again, this is just my opinion. Like I said, I've done many disputes and have never had a problem with the CRA's losing disputes...I've had many other problems with them, but not that.

Hopefully readers can decide how they want to do it by doing their own research.

I am sorry but the reasons you list for not sending the disputes CM is not a chance I am willing to take. In my experience, having sent disputes CM has been worth it and not unnecessary as you claim. And I didn't have to threaten litigation especially when I had proof and they were just simply WRONG.

I understand. But, in my experience, I'm still not convinced that it's necessary. To me it's not a right or wrong thing. Just an agreement to disagree.