2004 Credit Suit

Just about now would be a good time to wake up!

"We all live in modern, neatly-kept split-level houses with manicured lawns, gardens, etc. Everything on the inside looks marvelous and well-kept as well. Then something always happens-I drop something, or sit down somewhere, etc. and I notice the bricks, floorboards, etc. and everything IS ROTTING AWAY FROM THE BOTTOM UP!

I am always surprised that no one else notices this and that everyone continues as if everything is just peachy! If I walk out into the yard, the sunset is a bizarre color and almost frightening yet everyone seems totally oblivious to this and they are all saying how nice it is and what a wonderful day it is! I usually notice some worms, spiders, or something really disgusting at which point I awaken!"

This is someone's recurring dream. It's how I feel while I'm awake.

Most people are totally oblivious to reality, trying to save for their retirement, watching their investments, they see nothing wrong.

Sometimes I think I'm in a nightmare, it's so surreal, I'd like to wake up.

The big lie

I filed a Cap One bill and noticed this despicable ad for credit monitoring.

---------------------------------------

"The greatest threat to consumers today is the growing menace of identity theft"

United States Treasury
6/30/2003

----------------------------------------

The biggest threat to consumers it the U.S. Treasuries selling the consumers out to the banks and CRAs.

Looking at these lies makes me physically ill.

Why are Americans so incredibly stupid?

If you don't know what I'm talking about, please read my response to the FTC/FCC motion to dismiss

Here's the scan of that Capital One ad:

"I must be the stupidest MF on the planet!!!!"

I just got off the phone with Compass Bank. A few days ago I posted how they made a $500 error in MY favor and I called the branch to let them know.

Well, yesterday an unidentified $6 charge showed up, and today my account was debited with the $500.

So the lady at Compass Bank told me the $6 was for the research I ordered.

Can you believe this???????

I don't normally use "language", but I have limits. I explained to her that the branch didn't advise me that there would be a charge, and she didn't seem to care. She didn't appreciate my language.

Could somebody just shoot me and put me out of my misery?

I don't fit into this society.

Malvina Reynolds' "The Money Crop"

THE MONEY CROP

Well money has its own way,
And money has to grow,
It grows on human blood and bone
As any child would know.
It's iron stuff and paper stuff
With no life of its own,
And so it gets its growing sap
From human blood and bone.

Many a child goes hungering
Because the wage is low,
And men die on the battlefield
To make the money grow.
And those that take the money crop
Are avid without end,
They plant it in the tenements
To make it grow again.

The little that they leave for us
It cannot be a seed,
We spend it on the shoddy clothes
And every daily need,
We spend it in a minute,
In an hour it is gone,
To find its way to grow again
On human blood and bone,
Blood and bone.

Words and Music by Malvina Reynolds.
Copyright 1966, Schroder Music Co.

Need help in Portland getting the TU $5 million verdict court docs

The Trans Union conduct is so despicable, I decided to put that entire case online.

I already have some orders and judgments and the docket.

The docket alone is 22 pages to 1/03, so there's literally thousands of pages.

Called the court today and the computers are down until Monday, but if the file is in storage it'll cost $45 to get it, and then it's 15 cents/page if I make the copies. Thing is, I'm in AZ and if they make the copies, it's 50 cents/page and that's more than I can afford.

At 15 cents I'm looking at $150 for 1000 pages, that's about 1/2 hour of legal advice from an attorney if you can find one, and I haven't.

Since I don't have a lawyer and no legal skills, I need something to work off for my own filings. I'm so clueless, it's frustrating.

Scanning and posting everything is going to be a chore too. But considering the verdict, and Trans Union's despicable conduct and refusal to change their business and credit reporting practices, the public should have access to this case. Few consumers can find attorneys, we're left to fend for ourselves.

Anyway, if you're in Portland and have time during the day to make copies and send them to me, please let me know. christine@bayhouse.com

Dennis Kucinich gets 30% in Hawaii

MAHALO, HAWAII!

"... Kucinich is the only candidate running who did not get fooled by the WMD lies, who instead of war will deliver: Universal Health Care, Social Security Benefits at 65, Withdrawal from NAFTA and WTO, Repeal of the "Patriot Act" the Right to Choose, Privacy and Civil Rights, Balance between Workers and Corporations, Guaranteed Quality Education, Pre-K through College, A Renewed Commitment to Peace and Diplomacy, Restored Rural Communities and Family Farms, Environmental Renewal and Clean Energy. Go Dennis, Go! Run Dennis, Run!!!! ..."

Dennis Kucinich is the only candidate who walks his talk. He even sponsered legislation prohibiting mandatory arbitration clauses in consumer contracts in 1999 - of course it didn't go anywhere because there are so few politicians with integrity.

Docket update

1/30/04 126 ORDER by Judge Robert C. Broomfield that Consumerinfo's
Motion to Dismiss Complaint of Plaintiff Christine Baker as
to dft ConsumerInfo.com [23-1] is GRANTED IN PART AND
DENIED IN PART. It is DENIED as to Consumerinfo's motion to
dismiss Baker's claim under 15 USC 1681(e)e. It is GRANTED
as to all other claims argued in this motion; FURTHER
ORDERED that Baker's Motion for the court to Order
Consumerinfo.com to stop selling incomplete and incorrect
consumer disclosures and misleading and fraudulent credit
scores [33-1] is DENIED (cc: all counsel) (sat)
[Entry date 01/30/04]

2/2/04 127 RESPONSE by pla to Motion 12(b)(2) to Dismiss complaint
[1-1] for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction by dft Harry
Gambill [87-1], or in the alternative, Motion 12(b)(6) to
Dismiss (party) for Failure to State a Claim Upon Which
Relief can be Granted and Answer Subject Thereto (sat)
[Entry date 02/03/04]

2/4/04 128 ORDER by Judge Robert C. Broomfield granting plaintiff
Christine Baker's Motion to Exceed Page Limitations [125-1];
vacating [0-0] lodged document Reply to FTC and FCC Motion
to Dismiss (cc: all counsel) (sat) [Entry date 02/04/04]

2/4/04 129 RESPONSE (titled "Reply") by pla to Motion to dismiss as to
dft FTC, dft FCC for lack of subject matter jurisdiction,
on grounds of sovereign immunity by FTC, FCC [101-1] (sat)
[Entry date 02/04/04]

2/6/04 130 MOTION for Reconsideration of the Dismissal of Pacific
Bell by pla [130-1] (sat) [Entry date 02/09/04]

2/9/04 131 REPLY by dft Harry Gambill to Plaintiff's response to
Motion 12(b)(2) to Dismiss complaint [1-1] for Lack of
Personal by dft Harry Gambill [87-1] and Alternative Motion
12(b)(6) to Dismiss (party) for Failure to State a Claim
Upon Which Relief can be Granted and Answer Subject Thereto
[87-2] (sat) [Entry date 02/10/04]

2/9/04 132 MOTION for Security for Costs by dft Trans Union LLC
[132-1] (sat) [Entry date 02/10/04]

2/10/04 133 MOTION for Summary Judgment by dft Merchants Information
Solutions' (Credit Data SW) [133-1] (sat)
[Entry date 02/11/04]

2/10/04 134 STATEMENT OF FACTS by dft Merchants Information Solutions'
(Credit Data SW) in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment
by dft Merchants Information Solutions' (Credit Data SW)
[133-1] (sat) [Entry date 02/11/04]

2/10/04 135 EXHIBITS in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment by dft
Merchants Information Solutions' (Credit Data SW) [133-1]
by dft Merchants Information Solutions' (Credit Data SW)


Docket as of February 24, 2004 11:34 pm Page 26

Proceedings include all events.
3:03cv525 Baker v. Fair Isaac & Company, et al

(sat) [Entry date 02/11/04]

2/10/04 136 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by dft Merchants Information
Solutions Inc (formerly doing business as Credit Data SW)
(sat) [Entry date 02/11/04]

2/11/04 137 ORDER by Judge Robert C. Broomfield granting plaintiff's
Request for Extension of Time to Respond to Harry Gambill's
Motion to Dismiss [105-1] until 2/16/04 (cc: all counsel)
(sat) [Entry date 02/11/04]

2/11/04 138 NOTICE OF HEARING by dft Credit Data SW setting Motion for
Summary Judgment by dft Merchants Information Solutions'
(Credit Data SW) [133-1] at 11:00 4/5/04 (sat)
[Entry date 02/12/04]

2/12/04 139 REPLY by dft FTC, dft FCC to response in Support of Motion
to dismiss as to dft FTC, dft FCC for lack of subject
matter jurisdiction, on grounds of sovereign immunity by
FTC, FCC [101-1] (sat) [Entry date 02/12/04]

2/12/04 140 SUPPLEMENT by dft Tom Chapman to Motion to dismiss case and
memorandum of points and authorities by dfts Equifax Credit
Information Services, Tom Chapman [103-1] (sat)
[Entry date 02/12/04]

2/17/04 141 RESPONSE (Opposition) by dft Pacific Bell to Motion for
Reconsideration of the Dismissal of Pacific Bell by pla
[130-1] (sat) [Entry date 02/19/04]

2/24/04 142 ORDER by Judge Robert C. Broomfield that Baker's Motion for
Reconsideration of the Dismissal of Pacific Bell [130-1] is
DENIED (cc: all counsel) (sat) [Entry date 02/24/04]

The Postal Service reports to Experian

From the ConsumerInfo.com credit monitoring service:

"Address Changes: The following address changes were reported to Experian by the United States Postal Service (Information is taken from Notification for Change of Address form)."

Tips for attorneys on e-mail

Often attorneys ask me to forward to them leads for people interested in participating in class actions. Unfortunately, I just don't have the time and money - time is money and it's hard enough for me to make ends meet and I can't volunteer for lawyers.

Since I just explained to someone about disposable e-mails, I thought I'd mention it right here since so many lawyers read the blog.

Any e-mail posted on the web will soon get lots of spam. When you have a domain, you can open unlimited e-mail accounts. It's a good idea to use a specific mail for public posting and once you get too much spam, you simply turn it off.

If someone is looking for plaintiffs for a class against a specific company, the e-mail address could be experian@lawfirm.com. Or you could have an address for all contacts with the public, such as info@lawfirm.com.

You can set up an auto responder to people who e-mail to that address with an update, specific instructions, new contact info or a note that you're no longer interested in pursuing the matter.

With most web hosts you can set up a new mailbox in a matter of a few minutes, well, once you know how. You can also set up a forwarder so the e-mail to that address goes to your regular mail or to another person in your company or check it separately.

While you can also use one of the free yahoo etc. mails, I would be reluctant to e-mail there, a law firm domain name seems a lot more reputable.

Hope that helps.

ConsumerInfo.com national class action

Here's an excerpt from an attorney's e-mail:

"In order to evaluate the viability of doing a national class, I emailed more than a dozen affected individuals inviting them to discuss their claims further. No one has responded."

Well, most people really are just whiners and complainers. And they're getting exactly what they deserve.

Americans have the spine of slugs. A nation of losers. Very sad.

FCC $40,000 fine for record-keeping violations

Clear Channel cans Bubba the Love Sponge

"... Clear Channel Radio CEO John Hogan said he supports the decisions of our local managers in Florida. The FCC proposed a fine for broadcasts of Bubba's show of $715,000 for indecency and $40,000 for record-keeping violations. It is the largest single fine ever issued for indecent broadcasts. ..."

Why don't they fine the cell phone companies who defraud consumers and their excuse is that they have no records?

Verizon billed me for a check they sent me, but I didn't cash because they didn't owe me. They claimed to have no record of the check, and they obviously have no records of what the $90 is supposed to be for.

Pacific Bell: Appeal - Press releases - Retaliation

APPEAL

Judge Broomfield denied my motion for reconsideration and wrote:

"As part of its analysis, the court specifically queried whether Pacific might have an agency relationship with American Agencies. ... The court found that no evidence had been submitted which evidenced an agency relationship between Pacific and American. ... Pacific rebutted the agency relationship theory with the declaration of Zulkifli Iljas ...."

Could somebody please read the Zulkifli declaration and PLEASE tell me where the rebuttal is.

What am I missing?????????

Judge Broomfield wrote in his order to dismiss that I failed to supply any "competent evidence" and no affidavit to substantiate my allegations.

So, I verified my entire complaint, went through my Pac Bell exhibits in detail, spent a few hours getting it notarized, and then I'm told there's nothing new.

If American Agencies wasn't the agent for Pacific Bell, WTF were they doing collecting the Pacific Bell account???? Why am I suing them in this same action? DUH!

I feel like I'm talking to CRAs. How could I prove that they were the agent for Pacific Bell and that they didn't collect without authorization?????

Was I supposed to depose people or have witnesses at the hearing?

And why are the Pacific Bell declarations God's truth and everything I submit is deemed lies?

Well, I think I'll appeal this one. This ain't justice, I don't have the money, time and legal skills to sue in California.

And if I just let it go, the other defendants will pull that same shit. I'm tired of the lies.

PRESS RELEASES

It's about time I get started.

RETALIATION

If anyone has any suggestions on how I can do to Pacific Bell what they did to me, please let me know.

If you read the fax spam comments, you've seen the many ideas about calling the spammers on 800 #s, faxing black paper to waste their ink, etc.

I'm looking for something that'll REALLY cause them problems. I'd like their execs to worry like I did. Nothing criminal, but I'd love to do something that'll leave me saying: "Jurisdiction, jurisdiction!"

They not only sold the account for collection KNOWING that they had failed to credit my check, but they never once apologized and haven't offered one penny to settle.

I'm getting the feeling that Pacific Bell does this all the time. It's their routine.

Well, I'm in no hurry with my retaliation, there is no SOL and no jurisdiction.

I'll try the appeal and the press releases, see how that goes. If I can't find "justice" in the courts, I'm sure somebody will think of something good.

Compass Bank made a $500 error in MY favor, and I called

Sometimes I wonder if I'm really stupid or something.

A cash $200 deposit from the weekend showed up online as $700. Why did I call to let them know that they made a $500 error?

They are truly a vile outfit and have been so deceptive and mean, they even LIED about not receiving the complaint and waiver and then lied about answering, they filed a motion to dismiss instead.

What the hell is wrong with me?

Dumb and dumber: Bank One/FUSA unauthorized credit checks

They keep running Randy's credit without a hint of a permissible purpose even AFTER Randy sued them for exactly that!

Can that stupidity be topped? It looks like it.

A new outfit called "Bill me later" (ack!) offers the option to be billed for online purchases.

Credit cards get some competition

"Marino retired as chief credit officer and chief marketing officer of the consumer lending division at First USA/Bank One after 25 years in the credit card industry. ..."

"I4Commerce confirms customers' identities by asking for their name, address, birthdate and the last four digits of their Social Security number and uses that information for its credit check. And officials say giving out a partial Social Security number leaves one less vulnerable to hackers."

Are they putting something in the FUSA/Bank One cafeteria food or drinks?

While it's going to be so "EASY" for shoppers to enter their bd and last 4 digits of the SSN, won't those shoppers be surprised when their insurance and interest rates go up from all the inquiries. Of course they do have a permissible purpose since it is a business transaction, but it won't be long until the word will get out and they certainly won't get much repeat business.

Why don't they just issue a CHARGE CARD? Duh!

Maybe they'll somehow set it up so that repeat inquiries are A/Rs, but that definitely requires having an account with them.

And I sure don't like the idea that anyone with my bd and last 4 digits of my SSN can start ordering in my name and I much rather have the protection of using a credit card.

New bankruptcy/debt blog

http://www.maxedoutgen.com/

I enjoy reading there, very different from the credit boards with people obsessed with getting out of subprime hell and how to get the next new car financed. Whished I had more time to read.

I'm also going to update here and include links to other blogs like http://www.maxedoutgen.com/ - please post if you know of any other credit & debt related blogs to link to.

More mail trouble - this time at CreditCourt.com

Fortunately someone let me know that the mail was returned with a "mail box full" message.

The mail box can't really be full since I download my mail, but apparently the inbox got corrupted and it was at 10 mb, the mails weren't removed from the server as they should be. That's a couple years of "real" mail, but I get so much spam ...

Anyway, it should work now.

American Agencies = ACA?

How many names and/or corporations are there?

http://forum.creditcourt.com/discus/messages/3318/3727.html

If that's not illegal, it should be. I remember that I almost didn't sue American Agencies because I couldn't find them.

Another nightmare: American Agencies got my old clothes

This was strange. I went to American Agencies to prove that I made the Pacific Bell payment. Somehow, I was there for 2 hours talking to this young woman, who just went on and on about completely irrelevant things.

Finally she got up and went to a closet and pulled out two garbage bags with my old clothes!

I was shocked and asked where they got my old clothes. She told me that their manager went by my house and left bags at my door for stuff you want to give away. (In the BayArea some non profits actually did that sometimes.) So I filled the bags with old clothes and American Agencies picked them up.

I never got to present my cancelled check and I was incredibly thirsty. She told me to go to the water fountain downstairs, but it was luke warm water and didn't make me feel better at all.

Finally I woke up and I was totally dehydrated and my tongue felt like it was twice the size of my mouth. I quickly drank some water, it didn't do much. Went back to bed and had more weird dreams about being in the American Agencies building ... until I finally woke up exhausted.

Went out for a bite to eat with my neighbor yesterday, and the waitress had a terrible cold. It's beyond me why a restaurant would even ALLOW a sick waitress to work. So I guess I picked her cold up and I was breathing through my mouth. I better have some hot Santa Fe green chili later, can't afford to get sick. Last time I had a cold was in 99. And I'd like to keep it that way.

Petition for Judicial Review and Application for Writ of Mandamus

The California suit: http://www.blackboxvoting.org/dieboldlawsuit.pdf

The Washington suit: http://www.blackboxvoting.org/reedlawsuit.PDF

This was a great interview, Bev Harris also had lots of praise for Dennis Kucinich. He assisted her when Diebold sued her and had her web site shut down. On the issue: Electronic Voting

This is THE most important issue today.

It is unbelievable how many "errors" they make. Bev's book is available free for download and she lists elected officials who actively are AGAINST safeguards. http://www.blackboxvoting.org/

A little humor - animations:

http://www.markfiore.com/animation/voting.html

So "Fair Isaac!"

And this one's funny, WMD breast humor: http://www.markfiore.com/animation/breast.html

Black Box Voting: Suit against Diebold

Bev Harris and Jim March seek restraining order against Diebold Election Systems

"On Tuesday at 9:45 a.m. at the Sacramento Superior Court (Dept. 53, on 800 9th St., Sacramento California) Plaintiffs Jim March, Bev Harris, Joseph Holder, Jim Hamilton, Douglas McDonald, and the Community Labor Alliance will seek a restraining order against Diebold Election Systems. Diebold attorneys have been sent a copy of this lawsuit, which seeks an order requiring the DIEBOLD defendants to disgorge and make restitution of any money or property acquired by means of their unlawful, unfair and fraudulent acts and practices.

The attorney representing Harris, March, et. al. is Lowell Finley, who recently won the $4 million campaign finance violation suit against Arnold Schwarzenegger.

..."

Just like Fair Isaac: a huge FRAUD.

One of those voting machine counted a NEGATIVE 16,000 votes for Gore in 2000. Diebold makes it possible. Someone "tampered" with the memory card. A news person caught it when Gore all of a sudden lost those 16,000 votes.

Bev's on Coast tonight for a 3 hr interview.

Judge DENIED the First USA/Bank One motion for reconsideration!

That is just so cool! Of course that's Randy's case and he posted the order.

We need more judges who see through the corporate harassment of pro se plaintiffs and take the appropriate actions.

This is a great order, very encouraging.

Consumers Union on cell hell

EscapeCellHell.org

"Speak Out For Better Cell Phone Service

Tired of shouting to be heard on your cell phone? Raise your voice in action instead.

Join us in telling cell phone carriers that we want:

Better information about where your cell phone will work before buying a service plan.
Pro-rated early contract termination charges - consumers shouldn't have to pay the full fee near the end of a contract, which often ranges from $175 to $200 per phone.
A prohibition on companies "locking down" cell phones so they cannot be used on other carriers' networks.
ACT NOW -- Demand Better Cell Phone Service"

I just sent my complaints about T-Mobile (Voicestream) and Verizon, modified the complaint and sent the links to this blog and the case #. A copy goes to the FCC. I hope they don't bother to ask me for $165 to investigate.

I was so traumatized by the awful VoiceStream/T-Mobile service and before that Verizon and before that some outfit that went out of business, I have not even considered getting a cellphone again. I'm dreading the day when I have to subject myself again to lousy customer service, billing fraud and poor reception and coverage again because I'm on the road.

Woke up from nightmares about CreditData SW

I woke up after only 5 hours of sleep. I think I was dreaming about their motion for summary judgment because I read it last night, although I've been working on the Trans Union motion for security for costs and that's just as aggravating.

Maybe it's that CreditData SW offer to settle for ZERO dollars. It is just so offensive and it really upset me. The insult. A slap in the face. The contempt.

I tried to go back to sleep for over an hour, but I could not get my mind off reasonable procedures and how these morons think that it is my duty to spend my entire life, week after week, paying for, reviewing and disputing credit reports.

I'm very tired and very angry.

CreditData SW was a NON-PROFIT company?

In the Motion for Summary Judgment is something really odd: "MIS is an Arizona non-profit corporation which, at the times relevant to Baker's complaint, operated as a consumer reporting agency as defined by the FCRA, using the trade name Credit Data Southwest."

What? I hope he's not saying that they didn't pay income tax on those for profit activities!

How do I find out?

This is beginning to look like the Genus/Amerix non-profit credit counseling scam, and I'd sure like to have a look at their tax returns.

Something doesn't add up. They had awful service, as I posted here, I couldn't even dispute when I called them on MY buck.

A reader actually went to their office last year and he recorded his "in person" disputes, he was outraged by their conduct and lies.

Well, something reeks.

Who gets the money from the sale to Experian? How much did Experian pay?

They must have been drinking at CreditData SouthWest

Can you imagine that their attorney John Fry sent a SASE envelope with a letter requesting that I dismiss my case against them with prejudice?

"As you correctly note on your website, Merchants sold CreditData Southwest to Experian in August 2003. As a result, I would like to ask you to consider voluntary dismissing Merchants from your suit."

HUH???????

The Experian attorney specifically advised me that they are NOT picking up their liability.

They also submitted their Motion for summary judgment, and it's great that they supplied me with SO much documentation, this is what I've been waiting for.

The settlement offer to settle for nothing is the most hilarous offer yet. Only in America ....

CRA Discovery - starting an outline for Trans Union

From my posting at CreditCourt:

If you have any answers (from other suits or publications), please contact me at christine@bayhouse.com. Also appreciate any suggestions for the proper phrasing of my questions.

1) CEO Gambill claims that over 30% of disputes are from credit repair companies.

How do they know?

How many % and # of consumer disputes are refused by TU with the "credit repair" letter?

How many % and # of consumer disputes are refused by TU with the "need more ID" letter?

(This is relevant because they refused my dispute.)

2) Litigation

How many active suits?
How many suits filed last year?
Settled?
Pay out?
How many times was TU awarded attorney fees?
Case #s, dates, courts.

(related to their motion for security for costs.)

3) Reasonable procedures.

This should be an admission: TU has NO error checking in their database.

Have to read Eileen's depo for this.

Am looking for the desciption of how procedures are established. Names, job titles, etc.

4) How many consumers' files are blocked due to litigation (or other reasons)

(This is really important. I have NEVER seen my TU FICO score because Trans Union blocked my file since I sued in 2001.

This is seriously impacting on my ability to prove damages in the form of lower scores and consumers are reluctant to file suit against TU because they will lose access to their credit files.

Additionally, TU fails to provide me with telphone access and demands that I provide my number and sit by my phone for literally days until they feel like calling me.)

---------------------------

I will update at CreditCourt as I think of more questions or find answers.

Please post your comments and suggestions, or e-mail christine@bayhouse.com

The TU Motion for Security of Costs

I posted the scans at CreditCourt

This has to be one of the most pathetic motions ever! Ohhh, I have to post the exhibits still, they're most important. Fortunately, that's easy to do since it only involves links to my own pages such as my "about me" page, written mostly on 10/8/2000 on a rainy day in the Alaskan bush, but the final updates must have been made a few days after I got back to Arizona a few weeks later.

The fact that I spent many hours on my VACATION in Alaska writing about credit tells you something. I had less than $200 in the bank and it was OCTOBER. Nearly had to spend the winter in Alaska in my truck camper.

What are they SMOKING at TU?

Consumer affidavits for sale

I just read another complaint about the Capital One extremely poor customer service. Someone is trying to purchase copies of statements for a charged off account, and of course I know how AWFUL the Capital One business practices are.

So, I'm thinking that it really would be nice to get people to supply affidavits about their experiences with creditors, collectors and of course CRAs. It's kindof a hassle that you need original notarized signatures, and it's not cheap to get that done, it take me about 1.5 hours to get something notarized. When I was a notary in California, I charged $10/signature.

And then it has to be mailed too. So, while I don't think that people should make large amounts of money, one can't expect them to spend their time and money and not get reimbursed.

Is there something wrong with offering consumer affidavits for sale to other litigants, whether attorneys or pro ses?

It would be too cool to have a library with affidavits online, people can read the affidavit, and if it's useful to their case, they pay $20 or $30 to get an original.

Am I missing something? I sure would pay!

The plain English summary of the MBNA ruling

Court Backs Full Checks On Credit Complaints

"... Three judges on the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond unanimously found that MBNA, the giant Delaware credit card issuer, failed to conduct a reasonable investigation of a consumer's records because it conducted only a cursory review of its files.

The case involved Linda Johnson, owner of a hair salon in Newport News, who was unable to get a favorable mortgage rate after she found that her husband's overdue credit card account at MBNA had marred her clean credit file.

The decision goes to the heart of a continuing controversy about the growing number of errors on credit reports -- and how earnestly lenders have to check their files to correct mistakes. For many years, creditors have only verified that the information on their records matched the data at the three national credit bureaus; typically, they do not check original documents to make sure the information was correct in the first place.

..."

Unfortunately, below the article are the advertisements for the INCOMPLETE credit reports sold at TrueCredit (TU) and Fair Isaac.

2/11/04: 4th Circuit Court of Appeals AFFIRMS Johnson v. MBNA

YES!!!!

This is so nice to see. Richard Rubin and Leonard Bennett did it again. Rubin was counsel in the landmark Nelson v. Chase and established furnisher liability.

Leonard Bennett's testimony before Congress is posted at CreditCourt.

Johnson v. MBNA is about MBNA incorrectly verifying an AU account in response to factual CRA disputes.

Here is the entire ruling:

Document Body Page Navigation Panel
Pages 1--10 from Untitled

Page 1 2
PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

ü LINDA JOHNSON, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
MBNA AMERICA BANK, NA, Defendant-Appellant,

No. 03-1235 ý and
EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INCORPORATED; EQUIFAX CREDIT

INFORMATION SERVICES, INCORPORATED; TRANS UNION LLC,
Defendants. þ

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond.
Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge.
(CA-02-523)

Argued: December 4, 2003
Decided: February 11, 2004
Before WILKINS, Chief Judge, TRAXLER, Circuit Judge,
and Richard D. BENNETT, United States District Judge
for the District of Maryland, sitting by designation.

Affirmed by published opinion. Chief Judge Wilkins wrote the opin-ion,
in which Judge Traxler and Judge Bennett joined. 1
1 Page 2 3
COUNSEL
ARGUED: Earle Duncan Getchell, Jr., MCGUIRE WOODS, L. L. P., Richmond, Virginia, for Appellant. Richard John Rubin, Santa Fe,
New Mexico, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: William H. Baxter, II, James E. Brown, MCGUIRE WOODS, L. L. P., Richmond, Virginia, for
Appellant. Leonard A. Bennett, Newport News, Virginia, for Appel-lee.

OPINION
WILKINS, Chief Judge:
MBNA America Bank, N. A. (MBNA) appeals a judgment entered against it following a jury verdict in favor of Linda Johnson in her
action alleging that MBNA violated a provision of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), see 15 U. S. C. A. § 1681s-2( b)( 1) (West 1998)
(amended Dec. 4, 2003), by failing to conduct a reasonable investiga-tion of Johnson's dispute concerning an MBNA account appearing on
her credit report. Finding no reversible error, we affirm.
I.
The account at issue, an MBNA MasterCard account, was opened in November 1987. The parties disagree regarding who applied for
this account and therefore who was legally obligated to pay amounts owed on it. It is undisputed that one of the applicants was Edward N.
Slater, whom Johnson married in March 1991. MBNA contends that Johnson was a co-applicant with Slater, and thus a co-obligor on the
account. Johnson claims, however, that she was merely an authorized user and not a co-applicant.

In December 2000, Slater filed for bankruptcy, and MBNA promptly removed his name from the account. That same month,
MBNA contacted Johnson and informed her that she was responsible for the approximately $17,000 balance on the account. After obtain-ing
copies of her credit report from the three major credit reporting agenciesÐ Experian, Equifax, and Trans UnionÐ Johnson disputed

2 JOHNSON v. MBNA AMERICA BANK 2
2 Page 3 4
the MBNA account with each of the credit reporting agencies. In response, each credit reporting agency sent to MBNA an automated
consumer dispute verification (ACDV). The ACDVs that Experian and Trans Union sent to MBNA specifically indicated that Johnson
was disputing that she was a co-obligor on the account. See J. A. 278 (Experian) (" CONSUMER STATES BELONGS TO HUSBAND
ONLY"); id. at 283 (Trans Union) (" WAS NEVER A SIGNER ON ACCOUNT. WAS AN AUTHORIZED USER"). The ACDV that
Equifax sent to MBNA stated that Johnson disputed the account bal-ance.

In response to each of these ACDVs, MBNA agents reviewed the account information contained in MBNA's computerized Customer
Information System (CIS) and, based on the results of that review, notified the credit reporting agencies that MBNA had verified that the
disputed information was correct. Based on MBNA's responses to the ACDVs, the credit reporting agencies continued reporting the MBNA
account on Johnson's credit report.
Johnson subsequently sued MBNA, claiming, inter alia, that it had violated the FCRA by failing to conduct a proper investigation of her
dispute. See 15 U. S. C. A. § 1681s-2( b)( 1). A jury trial was held, and, following the presentation of Johnson's case, MBNA moved for judg-ment
as a matter of law. That motion was denied. After the close of the evidence, the jury found that MBNA had negligently failed to
comply with the FCRA, and it awarded Johnson $90,300 in actual damages. MBNA renewed its motion for judgment as a matter of law,
asserting that § 1681s-2( b)( 1) only required MBNA to conduct a cur-sory review of its records to verify the disputed information. Alterna-tively,
MBNA argued that even if it were required to conduct a reasonable investigation of Johnson's dispute, the evidence showed
that MBNA had met that obligation. The district court again denied MBNA's motion, concluding that § 1681s-2( b)( 1) required MBNA to
conduct a reasonable investigation and that there was sufficient evi-dence from which the jury could conclude that MBNA had failed to
do so.
II.
MBNA first maintains that the district court erred in ruling that § 1681s-2( b)( 1) requires furnishers of credit information to conduct a

3 JOHNSON v. MBNA AMERICA BANK 3
3 Page 4 5
reasonable investigation of consumer disputes. Section 1681s-2( b)( 1) imposes certain duties on a creditor who has been notified by a credit
reporting agency that a consumer has disputed information furnished by that creditor:

After receiving notice pursuant to section 1681i( a)( 2) of this title of a dispute with regard to the completeness or
accuracy of any information provided by a person to a con-sumer reporting agency, the person shallÐ

(A) conduct an investigation with respect to the disputed information;
(B) review all relevant information provided by the consumer reporting agency . . . ;
(C) report the results of the investigation to the consumer reporting agency; and
(D) if the investigation finds that the informa-tion is incomplete or inaccurate, report those
results to all other consumer reporting agencies to which the person furnished the information and
that compile and maintain files on consumers on a nationwide basis. 1

1 While this appeal was pending, § 1681s-2( b)( 1) was amended to add
a new provision imposing certain additional duties on creditors in con-nection with investigations of consumer disputes. See Fair and Accurate

Credit Transactions Act of 2003, Pub. L. No. 108-159, sec. 314( b), § 623( b)( 1)( E), 117 Stat. 1952, 1995-96. That provision is not relevant
to our resolution of this appeal.
We recognize that the FCRA applies not only to those that furnish and report consumer credit information but also to those that furnish and

report certain other types of information regarding consumers. See 15 U. S. C. A. § 1681a( d)( 1) (West 1998 & Supp. 2003). Thus, consistent
with other provisions of the FCRA, § 1681s-2( b) uses the general terms "furnisher[ ] of information" and "consumer reporting agency." However,
because of the specific nature of this case, and for ease of reference, in this opinion we use the terms "creditor" and "credit reporting agency."
Nonetheless, our discussion of § 1681s-2( b)( 1) and other FCRA provi-sions applies equally to those who furnish other types of consumer infor-mation.

4 JOHNSON v. MBNA AMERICA BANK 4
4 Page 5 6
MBNA argues that the language of § 1681s-2( b)( 1)( A), requiring furnishers of credit information to "conduct an investigation" regard-ing
disputed information, imposes only a minimal duty on creditors to briefly review their records to determine whether the disputed
information is correct. Stated differently, MBNA contends that this provision does not contain any qualitative component that would
allow courts or juries to assess whether the creditor's investigation was reasonable. By contrast, Johnson asserts that § 1681s-2( b)( 1)( A)
requires creditors to conduct a reasonable investigation. 2 We review this question of statutory interpretation de novo. See Holland v.
Pardee Coal Co., 269 F. 3d 424, 430 (4th Cir. 2001).
In interpreting a statute, we must first "determine whether the lan-guage at issue has a plain and unambiguous meaning with regard to
the particular dispute in the case." Robinson v. Shell Oil Co., 519 U. S. 337, 340 (1997). "Our inquiry must cease if the statutory language is
unambiguous and the statutory scheme is coherent and consistent." Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). "The plainness or ambiguity of
statutory language is determined by reference to the language itself, the specific context in which that language is used, and the broader
context of the statute as a whole." Id. at 341.
The key term at issue here, "investigation," is defined as "[ a] detailed inquiry or systematic examination." Am. Heritage Dictionary
920 (4th ed. 2000); see Webster's Third New Int'l Dictionary 1189 (1981) (defining "investigation" as "a searching inquiry"). Thus, the
plain meaning of "investigation" clearly requires some degree of care-2
Neither this court nor any other circuit has addressed the extent to which a creditor must investigate a consumer dispute in order to avoid
liability under § 1681s-2( b)( 1). However, district courts that have consid-ered the issue have consistently recognized that the creditor's investiga-tion
must be a reasonable one. See Agosta v. Inovision, Inc., 2003 WL 22999213, at *5 (E. D. Pa. Dec. 16, 2003); Buxton v. Equifax Credit Info.
Servs., Inc., 2003 WL 22844245, at *2 (N. D. Ill. Dec. 1, 2003); Wade v. Equifax, 2003 WL 22089694, at *2-* 3 (N. D. Ill. Sept. 8, 2003); Betts v.
Equifax Credit Info. Servs., Inc., 245 F. Supp. 2d 1130, 1135 (W. D. Wash. 2003); Olwell v. Med. Info. Bureau, 2003 WL 79035, at *5 (D.
Minn. Jan. 7, 2003); Kronstedt v. Equifax, 2001 WL 34124783, at *16 (W. D. Wis. Jan. 25, 2001); Bruce v. First U. S. A. Bank, 103 F. Supp. 2d
1135, 1143 (E. D. Mo. 2000).

5 JOHNSON v. MBNA AMERICA BANK 5
5 Page 6 7
ful inquiry by creditors. Further, § 1681s-2( b)( 1)( A) uses the term "investigation" in the context of articulating a creditor's duties in the
consumer dispute process outlined by the FCRA. It would make little sense to conclude that, in creating a system intended to give consum-ers
a means to disputeÐ and, ultimately, correctÐ inaccurate informa-tion on their credit reports, Congress used the term "investigation" to
include superficial, unreasonable inquiries by creditors. Cf. Cahlin v. Gen. Motors Acceptance Corp., 936 F. 2d 1151, 1160 (11th Cir. 1991)
(interpreting analogous statute governing reinvestigations of con-sumer disputes by credit reporting agencies to require reasonable
investigations); Pinner v. Schmidt, 805 F. 2d 1258, 1262 (5th Cir. 1986) (same). We therefore hold that § 1681s-2( b)( 1) requires credi-tors,
after receiving notice of a consumer dispute from a credit report-ing agency, to conduct a reasonable investigation of their records to
determine whether the disputed information can be verified.
III.
MBNA next contends that even if § 1681s-2( b)( 1) requires credi-tors to conduct reasonable investigations of consumer disputes, no
evidence here supports a determination by the jury that MBNA's investigation of Johnson's dispute was unreasonable. We review the
denial of MBNA's motion for judgment as a matter of law de novo. See Baynard v. Malone, 268 F. 3d 228, 234 (4th Cir. 2001). We must
view the evidence in the light most favorable to Johnson, the nonmo-vant, and draw all reasonable inferences in her favor without weigh-ing
the evidence or assessing the witnesses' credibility. See id. at 234-35. "The question is whether a jury, viewing the evidence in the light
most favorable to [Johnson], could have properly reached the conclu-sion reached by this jury." Id. at 235 (internal quotation marks omit-ted).
We must reverse if a reasonable jury could only rule in favor of MBNA; if reasonable minds could differ, we must affirm. See id.

As explained above, MBNA was notified of the specific nature of Johnson's disputeÐ namely, her assertion that she was not a co-obligor
on the account. Yet MBNA's agents testified that their inves-tigation was primarily limited to (1) confirming that the name and
address listed on the ACDVs were the same as the name and address contained in the CIS, 3 and (2) noting that the CIS contained a code

3 Under MBNA's procedures, agents are only required to confirm two
out of four pieces of information contained in the CISÐ name, address,

6 JOHNSON v. MBNA AMERICA BANK 6
6 Page 7 8
indicating that Johnson was the sole responsible party on the account. The MBNA agents also testified that, in investigating consumer dis-putes
generally, they do not look beyond the information contained in the CIS and never consult underlying documents such as account
applications. Based on this evidence, a jury could reasonably con-clude that MBNA acted unreasonably in failing to verify the accuracy
of the information contained in the CIS.
MBNA argues that other information contained in the CIS compels the conclusion that its investigation was reasonable. For example, in
support of its alleged belief that Johnson was a co-applicant, MBNA presented evidence that Johnson's last name had been changed on the
account following her marriage to Slater and that Johnson's name was listed on the billing statements. But this evidence is equally consistent
with Johnson's contention that she was only an authorized user on Slater's account and that, to the extent MBNA's records listed her as
a co-obligor, those records were incorrect. MBNA also points to evi-dence indicating that, during her conversations with MBNA following
Slater's bankruptcy filing, Johnson attempted to set up a reduced pay-ment plan and changed the address on the account to her business
address. However, a jury could reasonably conclude that this evidence showed only that Johnson had tried to make payment arrangements
even though she had no legal obligation to do so. Indeed, Johnson tes-tified that, during her conversations with MBNA, she had consistently
maintained that she was not responsible for paying the account.
Additionally, MBNA argues that Johnson failed to establish that MBNA's allegedly inadequate investigation was the proximate cause
of her damages because there were no other records MBNA could have examined that would have changed the results of its investiga-tion.
In particular, MBNA relies on testimony that, pursuant to its five-year document retention policy, the original account application
was no longer in MBNA's possession. Even accepting this testimony, however, a jury could reasonably conclude that if the MBNA agents
had investigated the matter further and determined that MBNA no
social security number, and date of birthÐ in order to verify an account holder's identity. Johnson's social security number and date of birth were
not listed on the CIS summary screen.

7 JOHNSON v. MBNA AMERICA BANK 7
7 Page 8 9
longer had the application, they could have at least informed the credit reporting agencies that MBNA could not conclusively verify
that Johnson was a co-obligor. 4 See 15 U. S. C. A. § 1681i( a)( 5)( A) (West 1998) (providing that if disputed information "cannot be veri-fied,
the consumer reporting agency shall promptly delete that item of information from the consumer's file or modify that item of infor-mation,
as appropriate, based on the results of the reinvestigation") (amended Dec. 4, 2003).

IV.
MBNA next asserts that the district court improperly instructed the jury regarding the standards for determining liability. We review chal-lenges
to jury instructions for abuse of discretion. See S. Atl. Ltd. P'ship of Tenn. v. Riese, 284 F. 3d 518, 530 (4th Cir. 2002). "Instruc-tions
are adequate if construed as a whole, and in light of the whole record, they adequately inform the jury of the controlling legal princi-ples
without misleading or confusing the jury to the prejudice of the objecting party." Id. (internal quotation marks & alterations omitted).
Even if we conclude that the challenged instructions are erroneous, we will not reverse "unless the error seriously prejudiced the chal-lenging
party's case." Id.
A.
MBNA first argues that the district court erred in instructing the jury that, in determining whether MBNA's investigation was reason-able,
it should consider "the cost of verifying the accuracy of the information versus the possible harm of reporting inaccurate informa-tion."
J. A. 767-68. MBNA apparently contends that the balancing test described in this instruction is inapplicable here because it is derived
from cases involving the reasonableness of a credit reporting agen-cy's reinvestigation, see, e. g., Cushman v. Trans Union Corp., 115

4 Because we conclude there is sufficient evidence to support a jury
finding that MBNA failed to conduct a reasonable investigation of John-son's dispute, we do not consider Johnson's argument that the judgment

should be affirmed on the alternative ground that MBNA failed to "report the results of the investigation to the consumer reporting agenc[ ies]," 15
U. S. C. A. § 1681s-2( b)( 1)( C).

8 JOHNSON v. MBNA AMERICA BANK 8
8 Page 9 10
F. 3d 220, 225 (3d Cir. 1997); Henson v. CSC Credit Servs., 29 F. 3d 280, 287 (7th Cir. 1994). We recognize that creditors and credit
reporting agencies have different roles and duties in investigating consumer disputes under the FCRA. Nevertheless, we believe that the
general balancing test articulated by the district courtÐ weighing the cost of verifying disputed information against the possible harm to the
consumerÐ logically applies in determining whether the steps taken (and not taken) by a creditor in investigating a dispute constitute a
reasonable investigation. The district court therefore did not abuse its discretion in giving this instruction.

B.
MBNA also contends that, after instructing the jury that the FCRA "does not require that credit card account records, including original
applications, be kept in any particular form," J. A. 770, the district court erred in further instructing the jury that "the law does prohibit
MBNA from maintaining its record[ s] in such manner as to con-sciously avoid knowing that information it is reporting is
[in] accurate," id. MBNA claims that this instruction improperly per-mitted the jury to assess the adequacy of MBNA's record keeping
system. However, the other detailed instructions given by the district court made clear that Johnson's claim was based on MBNA's failure
to conduct a reasonable investigation of its records, not on the inade-quacy of those records. And, it appears that the brief instruction chal-lenged
by MBNA, which the district court gave near the end of its jury instructions, was simply intended to clarify the legal effect of
MBNA not maintaining the original account applicationÐ not to invite the jury to independently assess MBNA's record keeping prac-tices.

MBNA further claims that the challenged instruction improperly incorporated a legal standard from another provision of § 1681s-2,
relating to the accuracy of information that creditors provide to credit reporting agencies. See 15 U. S. C. A. § 1681s-2( a)( 1)( A) (West 1998)
(prohibiting creditors from furnishing consumer information to a credit reporting agency "if the [creditor] knows or consciously avoids
knowing that the information is inaccurate") (amended Dec. 4, 2003). MBNA emphasizes that this provision is enforceable only by govern-ment
agencies and officials, not by consumers. See 15 U. S. C. A.

9 JOHNSON v. MBNA AMERICA BANK 9
9 Page 10
§ 1681s-2( d) (West 1998) (amended Dec. 4, 2003). Again, however, the extensive instructions by the district court made clear that John-son's
claim was based on MBNA's duty to investigate consumer dis-putes, not its duty to provide accurate information. Indeed, the district
court instructed the jury that the damages recoverable by Johnson "may not include any damages that were caused by the inaccuracy of
the information itself." J. A. 768. We therefore conclude that the instruction given by the district court did not mislead the jury or oth-erwise
prejudice MBNA.
V.
For the reasons set forth above, we affirm the judgment of the dis-trict court.

AFFIRMED

10 JOHNSON v. MBNA AMERICA BANK 10

More than $1.1 trillion of federal government money is missing?

Where is the Money????

"Petition To: The White House and Congress

More than $1.1 trillion of federal government money is missing. Our government leaders say they will not account for it. However finding this money could solve all of our federal, state and local budget crises.

Where is the Money?

The Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of the Inspector General has reported that HUD has not and will not account for $59 billion of "undocumentable adjustments."

The Department of Defense Office of the Inspector General has reported that DOD has not and will not account for $1.1 trillion of "undocumentable adjustments."

The "undocumentable adjustments" made by these government agencies are much like the balance adjustments many of us make when reconciling our checkbooks. Except that the amounts are staggering: California's share of the "undocumented adjustments" is $128 billion -- more than three times its current $35 billion budget deficit. The average American's share of the "undocumented adjustments" is almost $4,000 per person.

..."

Sign the petition!

Trans Union Motion for $5,000 Security for Costs

It's mail day.

And this is probably the funniest thing I've seen yet!

"Plaintiff, an experienced pro se, has a history of filing lawsuits. Plaintiff has filed three suits in small claims court in California and two in Arizona Justice Court in addition to the lawsuit pending in this Court ...."

"... Because of Plaintiff's financial condition, her lack of a meritorious claim against Trans Union, and the substantial amount of costs that could be awarded to the numerous Defendants, Trans Union requests that the Court order Plaintiff to post bond in the amount of $5000 or whatever amount the Court deems appropriate to secure the costs that have been and will be incurred by Trans Union in defending this lawsuit."

Apparently they wrote this in response to my objection to the TU CEO Harry Gambill motion to dismiss.

"Plaintiff requests that Harry Gambill not be dismissed because his company, Trans Union, inflicts serious damages on plaintiff and literally millions of people and Mr. Gambill categorically refuses to change his company’s policies and procedures. It is likely that Trans Union will be forced into bankruptcy due to consumer litigation and plaintiff would like to be able to collect the judgment she anticipates receiving against Trans Union in this action."

I have some real good evidence for this too, and I just hope that one of these days I'll be able to scan and post all filings.

NONE of the bureaus report the soft inquiries anymore

I guess they figure if they all stop reporting them, nobody will know those inquiries exist.

Equifax FICO report, and the TU online and the CreditExpert WASTE OF MONEY reports.

TU is NOT reporting all inquries

The report is dated 2/10/04, was ordered online at the Trans Union site.

There are NO soft inquiries at all, and only one year of hard inquiries, while they state: "INQUIRIES (2 years): 14"

Of course we got the usual DLA and other data missing.

Their database is so screwed up, and the online reports are so buggy (documented), just about anyone who buys a TU report has a legitimate reason to sue.

Defective Products and of course numerous FCRA violations

ConsumerInfo.com: Positive accounts reported "indefinitely"

It's what I've been asking for in my suit:

NO deletions of positive data because it's so important for FICO scores.

However, I'm afraid it's just another deception on the CIC and PrivacyGuard credit reports.

Today's screenshot:

First USA/Bank One wants arbitration - Motion for Reconsideration

That's of course Randy's case, he posted the Bank One filing.

They agree to litigate one account in court, but not the other. They want to litigate the enforcability of mandatory arbitration for the other account.

It's beyond me WHY they want 2 different proceedings about the same claims.

Are they idiots with too much money?

What is their goal?

They're hoping he'll die or just quit due to the stress?

Another ruling FOR arbitration?

It doesn't look like they can show that Randy used the card after he received the disclosures with the arbitration agreement.

Congress MUST change the laws to exclude all TIL, RESPA and FCRA claims from mandatory arbitration.

7th Circuit rules for Cap One

Mere Sale of Overdue Credit Card Account Doesn't Subject Purchaser to TILA Standards

"... The cardholders alleged that defendant Capital One FSB had purchased their delinquent accounts from the issuers and had settled the alleged debts with the cardholders. Almost 10 years later, however, the cardholders allegedly received letters from defendant Capital Acquisitions & Management Co. (CAMCO), which had purchased their accounts from Capital One. CAMCO demanded $2,835.32 from one cardholder and almost $7,000 from the other, most of which represented accumulated interest.

In their complaint against Capital One and CAMCO, the cardholders alleged that the defendants had violated TILA, the FDCPA, and the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act when they attempted to impose and collect interest on revolving credit accounts without sending monthly statements. The district court dismissed the federal claims for failure to state a claim and declined to take supplemental jurisdiction over the state claim.

..."

I really don't know what all this means. I get confused. Especially since it says the claims were settled. And then Cap One sold the settled claim to CAMCO and they collected again?

I must be missing something. Surely there would be something wrong with that practice.

I do understand that this is about the interest after the charge-off issue when no statements are sent.

And all I can say is that nothing proves better how UNFAIR this is than the Capital One/NCO/Genus/Amerix ploy. They deceived Katherine, she thought her charged off account would be paid off after 3 years of credit counseling payments.

Because NO statements were sent, she did not find out until the end the 3 years that Capital One did NOT accept the Genus proposal, and the payments barely covered the interest.

Katherine has looked for an attorney, she's in NC, but no attorney was interested. I don't get it.

Something really isn't right when nobody finds anything wrong with this.

I am however very glad that this got me involved with Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond and I got to see how evil the so-called regulators are.

I don't like what I learned these last couple years.

Another Experian order decline

I tried to submit the online dispute of the Cap One limits.

The CreditExpert monitoring service now has an option to dispute online with Experian, but apparently I'm still blocked.

Not only did I just PAY for the CreditExpert (Experian) credit monitoring service with MY credit card, but I also answered several security questions.

Their "Error" message is as idiotic as ever:

"We are unable to allow access to our online dispute service. We understand that the privacy and security of your information is important to you; therefore, we cannot provide a specific reason as to why we cannot allow access. Our registration process is designed to ensure that your credit information is released only to you. You must have a current copy of your personal credit report from Experian in order to dispute information. Please call 1 866 851 6901 to order your report through our automated service."

I called the automated 866-851-6901. Maybe it's because it's late, but I need some help here. I couldn't figure out which option to select to submit my dispute. I listened to various messages on how to order your report.

I do not want to ORDER my report, I want to dispute. If anyone knows how to dispute by calling this number, please post or e-mail.

Despite my repeated notices to Experian that ONLY online access is reasonable secure, and my Exhibit A proves how frequently mail is misdelivered, Experian decides to not only inconvenience me, but subject me to ID theft by refusing online access.

My e-mail to Senator Kerry returned by auto responder

I sent a notice of publication of the Judy Morris "Kerry, the do-nothing Senator" to his senate.gov address. And it was promptly returned with the following message:

Subject: Thank you for contact my office
Thread-Topic: Kerry, the do-nothing Senator
From: "Kerry, John (Kerry)"

Thank you for contacting my office. In an effort to more effectively
manage the increase in the volume of e-mails received by my office and
to respond as quickly and thoroughly as possible, I am using a new web
based system that you can access through my web site at
"kerry.senate.gov". Just click on e-mail under the contact session of
the web site and complete the new web form.

The e-mail address john_kerry@kerry.senate.gov will no longer be
active. The message you just sent was not received and should be
resubmitted via the web form. Thank you for understanding and again
please feel free to contact me with any issues of concern. I look
forward to hearing from you.

Best regards,
John Kerry
US Senator

-------------------------------

My fax to Senator Kerry:

Dear Senator Kerry:

The disabling of your senate.gov e-mail is not a presidential act.

The message is clear, you don't want to hear from us. I rather spend the money to send you a fax, it's faster, and I'll have proof of delivery. Most important, I have a record of my fax to you in my e-mail program, so I can locate it even years from now.

Sincerely,

Christine Baker

c: posted at http://www.creditsuit.org/blog/archives/000353.html

-------------------------------------------

Attn: Senator Kerry's PR staff

Notice of republication of the Morris letter and request for comments:

http://www.creditsuit.org/blog/archives/000350.html

Please let me know if you find any inaccuracies and/or you have any comments.

Thanks,

Christine Baker

-----------------------------------

Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2004 17:29:25 -0800 -0800
From: faxaway@faxaway.com
Subject: CONFIRM: Kerry, the do-nothing Senator

Hello from Faxaway, the world's easiest E-Mail to Fax service!

CONFIRMATION OF YOUR FAX TRANSMISSION
FAX STATUS: SUCCESSFUL TO 12022248525
COUNTRY: 1-NORTH AMERICA
TRANSMISSION: 10-Feb-2004 01:28:58 GMT.
1 Page(s).
DURATION: 1 Minute
TOTAL COST: $0.11

Pentagon preparing for global climate collapse?

The Pentagon's Weather Nightmare

"... Global warming may be bad news for future generations, but let's face it, most of us spend as little time worrying about it as we did about al Qaeda before 9/11. Like the terrorists, though, the seemingly remote climate risk may hit home sooner and harder than we ever imagined. In fact, the prospect has become so real that the Pentagon's strategic planners are grappling with it."

Of course they've been working on weather modification for years (HAARP and other projects) but this is probably too big.

"... Scientists aren't sure what caused the warming that triggered such collapses in the remote past. (Clearly it wasn't humans and their factories.) But the data from Arctic ice and other sources suggest the atmospheric changes that preceded earlier collapses were dismayingly similar to today's global warming. As the Ice Age began drawing to a close about 13,000 years ago, for example, temperatures in Greenland rose to levels near those of recent decades. Then they abruptly plunged as the conveyor apparently shut down, ushering in the "Younger Dryas" period, a 1,300-year reversion to ice-age conditions. (A dryas is an Arctic flower that flourished in Europe at the time.)

Though Mother Nature caused past abrupt climate changes, the one that may be shaping up today probably has more to do with us. In 2001 an international panel of climate experts concluded that there is increasingly strong evidence that most of the global warming observed over the past 50 years is attributable to human activities—mainly the burning of fossil fuels such as oil and coal, which release heat-trapping carbon dioxide. Indicators of the warming include shrinking Arctic ice, melting alpine glaciers, and markedly earlier springs at northerly latitudes. A few years ago such changes seemed signs of possible trouble for our kids or grandkids. Today they seem portents of a cataclysm that may not conveniently wait until we're history. ..."

That puts my problems in perspective.

And it is so typical. It doesn't matter which problem you look at, the focus of the governments and corporation is only on profits NOW, without any regard to the future.

I wouldn't mind a fresh start for the planet, a reboot, wiping out all humans. But that's unlikely, wealthy people and probably the credit bureaus and banks would survive. And lots of new relocation and construction companies would have a booming business.

Lord of the Rings - reflections

In an unprecedented move, I rented the two Lord of the Rings DVDs. I very rarely watch a movie, really don't have time for fiction with so much reality going on.

It was fun to watch the movies and to not think about reality for a few hours. But I've been wondering about what I'm doing, or trying to do here for years and I can't help but think about the big picture and comparing it to those movies.

Evil is everywhere. In the banks, the CRAs, the government and politicians, the media, the insurance companies, the pharmaceuticals, the defense industry, all these multi-national corporations, ...

It really doesn't matter where I look, the corporations and governments are focused on getting peoples' money and data, increasing their power to control the population, to add to their already unlimited wealth.

I've been actively trying to help people fight corporate fraud since 1994, and we're losing our freedoms and rights so fast, it is incredible and totally overwhelming.

It seems like I accomplished less than nothing.

It's frustrating. Why do I bother? It really seems hopeless.

But as long as there's some hope, it's tough to let go and leave people to their misery. I don't really have a stake in all this. I want to go to Nicaragua. Why do I care?

Nicaragua will be no different from the U.S. as soon as there are enough assets to make it worthwhile for the CRAs and banksters to exploit the Nicaraguans as Shell and Dole have been doing on the plantations.

Just like in those movies, we have many independent countries on our planet. But all of the so-called civilized countries I have looked at are either ruled by evil people or these same evil corporations have significantly influenced the governments and one way or another, the people get screwed.

State and local laws are exterminated by federal courts in the U.S., EU nations have uniform privacy and credit laws and they are eroding fast. China is next. Iraq is the beginning of the Middle Eastern assimilation ...

The IMF prepared many Central and South American, African, Asian and other "developing" countries for the corporate raiders.

The goal everywhere is an uneducated work force, satisfied with a life revolving around sex, family, beer and TV. Activism, idealism and individualism are not desirable. The profits go to the elitists, the wealthy, the CEOs and upper management, and of course to the politicians.

I don't know much about Kerry and he might just become the Democratic candidate. I don't like that he doesn't care about insurance fraud and I'm concerned with his Skull and Bones membership. From http://indybay.org/news/2004/01/1668277.php

"John Kerry has absolutely nothing to say on that subject. Sorry,'' said Kerry spokeswoman Kelley Benander.

I have heard this story many times, why does Kerry have nothing to say? He's in the same club with the Bushies and he's supposed to be an "alternative"???

My Dad has claimed for many years that 7 men rule the planet. It does seem a little odd that there is so little energy dedicated towards making Earth a better planet for all. But it might well be that the corporate executives are simply doing whatever they can to exploit the masses and that it's just human nature.

The "anyone but Bush" talk is not good.

Maybe it's already too late. Maybe it's just not possible to get an honest politician as president.

I've come to admire Dennis Kucinich. He doesn't care what the polls and the media say. There've been times when I couldn't sleep and everything seemed like one big waste of time. And then I thought about Dennis and his campaign, and his message. He doesn't care if nobody thinks he can win, he has a message and he's getting it out. He's the only politician I know of who stood up to the banks. He told the media what he thinks, regardless of the consequences. Of course he can't win without the media, but I admire him for not selling out. And he gives me hope.

Watching those movies also illustrated nicely how so few people are willing to fight for their rights. I could write pages just on the excuses I've heard, but most often I read:

I can't afford it.
I'm afraid.
I don't have time.
I don't know how.
My problem got solved, for now.
I might get a promotion and I'll be fine, some day.
I might win the lottery or otherwise escape from my misery ...

It's too late, resistance is futile.

That will probably be my excuse when I quit.

It sucks that those few who are actually dedicating their lives to fighting evil get so little attention. I look at Judy Morris and her incredible fight and superb web site, why didn't anyone send me the link?

I look at how many people have read my sites, and how few have submitted evidence against the CRAs. The biggest disappointments are the owners and moderators of http://www.creditboards.com/phpBB2/ That site gave me hope, I thought it was about changing the ways of the CRAs, creditors and collectors. It turned out that they're WITH the CRAs and Fair Isaac. They promote the fear of the CRAs and secrecy.

Their goal is to utilize the awful credit reporting system for their and their readers' personal advantage. They couldn't care less about people who don't have the time/money/knowledge to file credit repair law suits.

It's all about moving up into the class of people who benefit from the exploitation of the disadvantaged.

Their motto is "We can't beat them, so we'll join them." And some actually think there's nothing wrong.

But then there's Randy and his published suit, and he makes up for many disappointments. He could have just taken the $3,000 First USA offered, or countered with a slightly higher offer, but he didn't. And he showed us all that there is still hope when the judge denied the First USA motion to compel arbitration and dismiss.

Randy isn't a lawyer, and he prevailed.

He cares enough to post it all. Just a few months ago he didn't know how to scan, now he runs a blog and a web site while writing motions and being sick for 2 months now.

So, all hope isn't lost yet. Still, I feel like we're the hobbits, rather clueless, just doing whatever we can. We can win some small battles, but we can't win the big fight.

I'm certain that we don't have much time left and if the corporations become any more powerful, resistance will be futile. This isn't a situation like with Hitler or Saddam. There is no country to step in and rescue us once we lost all powers. This is *it.* We are it.

It's about time some invincible people, wizards or elves with powers and magic come along.

Legal skills and cash wouldn't hurt either. Unfortunately, the two or three people with serious money and a sincere interest in the fight against evil have disappeared, I don't know what happened. And Ralph Nader was either bought or threatened into giving up or maybe he thinks it's too late. A penny for his thoughts ...

It sure is strange that I can't even think of 10 people seriously fighting corporate crime and exploitation. I know some litigants who really tried, they all gave up, gained nothing but illness and/or divorce. The stress is overbearing, I don't think many relationships can last more than a few months. Once you're talking years, litigation takes its toll.

There are many fake "consumer advocates" with web pages featuring deceptive ads to the CRAs and Fair Isaac. And the lawyers, well, that's another subject. I never received one penny from a lawyer or any credit related business.

I ran into many more traitors than true friends, from the attorneys to the consumers. It is depressing how much mail I get from fake consumer advocates, looking for an endorsement or my expertise free of charge. I know a "consumer advocate" credit expert who provides expert testimony. His "advocacy" comes with a $2,500 minimum retainer, payable in advance.

As much as I hate to have to do this, I'm also going to have to turn a lot more people away. It takes too much time to deal with people who just want to get their credit fixed. I am going to limit my time to working with people who are willing to contribute, and I'm not talking about money.

So where's our Aragon?

I'll try to keep on going as long as there's hope.

Judy Morris, M.D.: Kerry, the do-nothing Senator

Judy Morris rocks! She says exactly how it is.

"... your excuse that your office can "not become involved in matters currently before the courts" is BS."

I'm sending him a copy of this posting to john_kerry@kerry.senate.gov, to make sure this is accurate and whether he has a response.

Repost of the entire letter for maximum exposure in the search engines:

Senator John Kerry -
One Financial Plaza
12th Floor
Springfield, MA 01103 Jan. 26, 2004

Dear Senator Kerry,

As one of your constituents who has appealed to you repeatedly for help in the last 5 years, I am proud to promote you as THE DO-NOTHING SENATOR who will be a DO-NOTHING PRESIDENT.

My repeated written requests to your office with help in bringing a corrupt insurer (and our state insurance commission that is aiding and abetting them) to justice have been repeatedly met with "Do-Nothing" responses.

Considering that Senator's Kennedy and Brewer and Representative Neal each, AT LEAST, referred my letters to representatives of the State and Federal Justice Departments (UNUMProvident is currently the subject of a 45 state investigation), your excuse that your office can "not become involved in matters currently before the courts" is BS. I am in civil litigation but I am reporting to you a pattern of CRIMINAL RACKETEERING.

But considering that our current president is so action oriented (doing much in the way of benefiting wealthy criminal corporations and his rich buddies, as well as starting unprovoked wars), maybe a DO-NOTHING PRESIDENT is what the NATION NEEDS.

So you will be glad that I am promoting you to my friends and acquaintances and through my website (www.corporatecrimefighters.com) as the DO-NOTHING PRESIDENT. I'm sure that will help you get elected.

By the way, if you are in need of a good sound byte, you might consider the following:

Q: Why is President George W. Bush against abortion?

A: He needs cannon-fodder.

Your loyal constituent.

Judy Morris, M.D.

How To Contact Senator John Forbes Kerry

Washington DC EMail Address: john_kerry@kerry.senate.gov
Washington DC Web Address: http://www.senate.gov/~kerry/

Washington DC Address

304 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510-2102
Phone: 202-224-2742
Fax: 202-224-8525

District Address - Worcester

90 Madison Place, Room 205
Worcester, MA 01608
Phone: 508-831-7380
Fax: 508-831-7381

District Address - Springfield
One Financial Plaza
12th Floor
Springfield, MA 01103
Phone: 413-785-4610
Fax: 413-736-1049

District Address - Boston
1 Bowdoin Square, 10th Floor
Boston, MA 02114
Phone: 617-565-8519
Fax: 617-248-3870

cc: Howard Dean
John Edwards
Wesley Clark
Joseph Lieberman
Al Sharpton
Dennis Kucinich

"Giant corporations. They rob, they kill, ...

... they wreck lives, they buy the law. They commit crimes with impunity and laugh as they crush their tiny victims. The only thing that can put them in their place is the truth. That’s what this database is all about.

We’ll start with the worst first. An insurance company that cheats the disabled, driving them to destitution, madness and even suicide, in order to line the pockets of its greedy CEO and criminal management crew:"

http://www.micethatroar.com/

It is inspiring to see Judy Morris' RICO suit against UNUM

"What This Page is About

My name is Dr. Judy Morris. I was an Emergency Room Physician disabled by an immunological condition known as Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. With my doctor's approval I submitted applications for disability benefits from UNUM Insurance Company of Portland, Maine, with whom I had purchased an individual policy and been provided a group policy through my employer.

UNUM set about denying my claims for disability benefits by having me followed by Private Investigators for over 2 1/2 weeks, including one night when someone tried to run me off the road. I subsequently saw the PI reports and they were falsified regarding that incident and some other incidents that occurred while PI's were following me.

..."

I am fully aware of the daily insurance fraud, it's amazing how many readers are fighting insurance companies and credit bureaus at the same time.

This is a fantastic resource, as many filings are posted and you should want to file a RICO suit, definitely read that site.

TU CEO Gambill: Admissions and Deceptions in front of Congress

PRISON time for Harry Gambill! With a lot of luck, a RICO suit will put him there.

It is really disturbing to have to deal with such totally evil people, I hope I never have to meet him in person. He knows exactly that Trans Union credit reports inflict horrendous damages on many millions of people too weak, ill or poor to fight for accurate, complete and up-to-date Trans Union credit reports in court.

How can Harry Gambill, supposedly a human being, be so incredibly evil?

The transcript of Harry Gambill's Admissions and Deceptions.

First USA & Bank One motions to compel arbitration and to dismiss DENIED!

I was so thrilled that Randy prevailed, and this was really important too.

The ORDER

That's a really important decision. I'm sure FUSA / Bank One expected Randy not to respond or the judge finding in their favor, although it really would have been hard to justify a dismissal of the claims not at all subject to arbitration.

One account apparently was purchased after the charge-off, so there can't be a card agreement, and the inquiries without permissible purpose also have nothing to do with arbitration agreements.

I've been worried about Randy because he's been sick for a couple months now and I really think he should get an attorney if he can't settle in the next few days.

First USA / Bank One already scheduled a deposition, to last until they're done. They have a lot of nerve!

Nobody should ever be deposed without counsel, especially not by scum like First USA / Bank One. There is no way that they can truly belief that they are right. To report a balance after an account has been discharged and to insist that it is factual reporting is crazy!

They are intentionally inflicting damages, just like Capital One with their refusal to report the credit limits.

It's an all out assault on 50+ million people, a deliberate and very successful attempt to artificially lower the credit scores and to force them to pay higher interest rates and insurance premiums.

It's not about "errors" and "mistakes."

Breast exposure or billing fraud, what to investigate?

Apparently that's not a difficult decision for FCC chairman Michael Powell. Like just about all guys, he thinks with his you know what.

Billing fraud: Demand $165 from the victims and make it clear that they should retain attorneys.

Breast exposure: Definitely demand a close look and an immediate in depth investgation, no fees need to be paid and no attorneys need to be retained. Breasts must be investigated!

Oh well, what else could one expect?

FCC To Investigate Jackson Breast Exposure Incident

"The apology isn't going to settle the matter, as far as FCC chairman Michael Powell is concerned.

"I have instructed the commission to open an immediate investigation into last night's broadcast," Powell said in a statement.

Powell said the investigation would be "thorough and swift." He wasn't hiding his anger in the statement.

"I am outraged at what I saw during the halftime show of the Super Bowl," Powell said. "Like millions of Americans, my family and I gathered around the television for a celebration. Instead, that celebration was tainted by a classless, crass and deplorable stunt. Our nation's children, parents and citizens deserve better." ..."

If he got his mind out of the gutter for a few minutes he might realize that there are more important issues.

I've been litigating against Pacific Bell for 2 years and the only thing I accomplished was that they sold the account for further collection.

The thieves at Verizon and T-Mobile have not adjusted their billing. FCC chairman Michael Powell is not concerned with that at all.

Docket update

[ SELECT EVENTS FROM THE DOCKET REPORT FOR CASE: 3:03cv00525
FOR THE PERIOD 01/20/2004 to 02/03/2004 ]

1/26/04 117 MINUTE ENTRY before Judge Robert C. Broomfield. ECR: Vicki
Reger. Appearances: Plaintiff, Christine Baker, is
present telephonically. Defense counsel, Robert Bruno and
Steven Rathfon (telephonically), are present. Motion
Hearing re: defendants', Fair Isaac & Company, G
Grudnowski, Barry Paperno, and Thomas J Quinn, Motion to
Dismiss [63-1], and defendant, Pacific Bell, Motion to
Dismiss Complaint for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction [43-1]
held. IT IS ORDERED taking these matters under advisement.
[cc: RCB] [117-1] (kbet) [Entry date 01/26/04]

1/28/04 118 ORDER by Judge Robert C. Broomfield that Craig Smith's
Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff Christine Baker's Complaint as
to dft Craig Smith [30-1] is GRANTED; party Craig Smith
dismissed; tlabel (cc: all counsel) (sat)
[Entry date 01/28/04]

1/28/04 119 ORDER by Judge Robert C. Broomfield that Defendants Motion
to Dismiss on Behalf of dft Fair Isaac & Company, dft
Thomas G Grudnowski, dft Barry Paperno, dft Thomas J Quinn
by dft Fair Isaac & Company, dft Thomas G Grudnowski, dft
Barry Paperno, dft Thomas J Quinn [63-1] is GRANTED; party
Fair Isaac & Company dismissed, party Thomas G Grudnowski
dismissed, party Barry Paperno dismissed, party Thomas J
Quinn dismissed (cc: all counsel) (sat)
[Entry date 01/28/04]

1/28/04 120 ORDER by Judge Robert C. Broomfield that Pacific's Motion
to Dismiss Complaint for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction by
dft Pacific Bell [43-1] is GRANTED; party Pacific Bell
dismissed, tlabel (cc: all counsel) (sat)
[Entry date 01/28/04]

1/28/04 121 ORDER by Judge Robert C. Broomfield granting Motion to
Dismiss Defendant Providian Financial Corporation With
Prejudice as to dft Providian by pla [109-1]; IT IS ORDERED
dismissing this action as to dft Providian Financial
Corporation with prejudice; party Providian dismissed;
tlabel (cc: all counsel) (sat) [Entry date 01/28/04]

1/28/04 122 ORDER by Judge Robert C. Broomfield granting motion for
admission pro hac vice as to Lewis P. Perling, atty for dft
Equifax Credit [115-1] (cc: all counsel) (sat)
[Entry date 01/28/04]

1/28/04 123 ORDER by Judge Robert C. Broomfield pursuant to
plaintiff's Motion Requesting Permission to attend hearings
in the above-captioned action via telephone [108-1], IT IS
ORDERED granting plaintiff Christine Baker permission to
attend hearings by telephonic appearance (cc: all counsel)
(sat) [Entry date 01/28/04]

1/28/04 124 MOTION for Summary Disposition re Defendants' Motion to
Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint filed 12/15/03 by dft Federal
Reserve Bk R, dft James McAfee [124-1] (sat)
[Entry date 01/29/04]

1/29/04 125 MOTION to Exceed Page Limitations for doc(s) Plaintiff's
Reply (Response) to FTC and FCC Motion to Dismiss by pla
[125-1] (Plaintiff's Reply (Response) to FTC and FCC Motion
to Dismiss lodged and held at docket clerk's desk) (sat)
[Entry date 01/30/04] [Edit date 01/30/04]

1/29/04 -- LODGED Reply (Response) to FTC and FCC Motion to Dismiss by
pla (held at docket clerk's desk) (sat)
[Entry date 01/30/04]

1/30/04 126 ORDER by Judge Robert C. Broomfield that Consumerinfo's
Motion to Dismiss Complaint of Plaintiff Christine Baker as
to dft ConsumerInfo.com [23-1] is GRANTED IN PART AND
DENIED IN PART. It is DENIED as to Consumerinfo's motion to
dismiss Baker's claim under 15 USC 1681(e)e. It is GRANTED
as to all other claims argued in this motion; FURTHER
ORDERED that Baker's Motion for the court to Order
Consumerinfo.com to stop selling incomplete and incorrect
consumer disclosures and misleading and fraudulent credit
scores [33-1] is DENIED (cc: all counsel) (sat)
[Entry date 01/30/04]

[END OF DOCKET: 3:03cv525]

Talked with Experian attorney - CreditData SW acquired by Experian

Courtney Vaudreuil called today, and we talked about a number of issues.

I've been expecting Experian to buy CreditData SW, but it went right by me, as of September Experian handles all disputes. However, claims prior to September remain separate, CD SW still exists as a separate corporation.

Courtney wanted to know what my remaining claims are, and I can't even begin to list them all.

I tried to dispute the Cap One missing limit recently online and my dispute was refused. She told me that's because I'm in litigation and disputes are to be directly submitted to the attorneys, i.e. her.

Strangely, I specifically mentioned the Cap One limits in my complaint as well as numerous subsequent filings, but the limits are STILL missing.

What's one to do?

Courtney said she read my web sites and it's clear that I'm concerned with bigger issues than my credit report, but that the judge wants to focus on my credit report and that I should submit to her my report with the problems and work towards settling.

Well, there really are no other problems other than the limits and nitpicking over recent payments that aren't reported or are reported incorrectly, stuff like that.

I did tell her that I have numerous NEW problems since the filings, especially because CreditExpert now sells the ConsumerInfo.com INCOMPLETE reports since 1/21 or so.

Things aren't getting better, they're getting worse.

She suggested that I might be better off taking this to Congress, but of course I have to have a court order stating that it is legal to sell incomplete consumer disclosures first.

The judge ruled last week that he thinks the ConsumerInfo.com reports provide more complete information! All it takes is to count the data fields on the Experian report and then on the ConsumerInfo.com report, and the numbers will show that ConsumerInfo.com is deleting lots of data.

Here's a challenging calculation:

The FCRA limits the fee for the consumer disclosures to $9. Courtney wasn't aware of an increase.

ConsumerInfo.com (and all CRAs) sell tri-merged reports for $30+, sometimes $39.

Let's analyze this problem. A tri-merged report contains 3 consumer disclosures. 3 x 9 = 27

Soooo. Are we paying extra for the deleted data?

I have so many issues with Experian, ConsumerInfo.com and CreditExpert, I obviously have to prepare a supplemental complaint.

FNMA paying their execs too much?

Fannie Mae Warns Congress Not to Give Out Pay Info

"... Fannie, like other publicly traded companies, releases information on the compensation of its five highest-paid executives in Securities and Exchange Commission (News - Websites) filings once a year. The list being sought by the congressional subcommittee contains the top 20 executives.

The confrontation comes at a sensitive time for Fannie, a government-sponsored company charged with pumping money into the housing market. Congress is preparing to renew debate on legislation that would tighten regulation of Fannie and its smaller rival, Freddie Mac. Fannie is determined to avoid legislation that would constrain its growth. Any release of information suggesting that Fannie pampers its top executives could undercut the company's attempts to fend off unwanted restrictions. ..."

Yeah, those unwanted restriction. I've seen FNMA forclose on and evict a single mom and her girl. She had made every payment, I personally reviewed the original money order receipts.

NCO collector threatened kid?

NCO Lawsuit Following Trend of Suits Against Collection Agencies.

"... In the lawsuit, filed in December, Koch alleges that during an Aug. 25 call to his home, an NCO employee demanded money from his 12-year-old son and told the boy he "was coming to his school to get him." Koch claims that when he called the employee back he was told: "I'm coming to get the money and will do bodily harm to anyone who gets in my way."

Those exchanges are among the comments made by NCO employees to Koch and his family between March and September of last year, according to allegations in court documents. NCO Group has not yet filed a response to the complaint.

..."

I should post some excerpts of my own calls.

Posted Pacific Bell Order

I posted the order. I see a lot about my failure to provide "admissible" evidence. It reads to me like I should submit a motion for reconsideration with an affidavit and explain a few things.

Here's the faxed order:

http://forum.creditcourt.com/discus/messages/803/3527.html

If I should really find the time to file in California, do I have to name American Agencies there too?

That's really weird. And I just don't have the time. Still working 100 hour weeks and so behind on publishing filings and haven't done any press releases yet, it's really time to get the word out.

I'm not superwoman and my day has only 24 hours.

My head his spinning from all that jurisdiction talk.

Order re. ConsumerInfo.com hard inquiry, incomplete reports and snake oil scores

Judge Broomfield's decision:

The 14 page faxed order is posted at CreditCourt

The hard inquiry

I commend him for seeing through the CIC lame attempt to use the reports dated over two years later to prove that the inquiry wasn't hard.

I kept wondering whether I should have replied to that, even though it would have been late.

Now, it would be really good if some other people had the guts to submit evidence that these consumer disclosures are occasionally miscoded as hard inquiries. Or file their own suits. Whatever ... The purpose of this exercise is to get them to FIX whatever the problem is.

As far as I know, it's not a problem at Experian, but both Equifax and TU ConsumerInfo.com are *occasionally* reported as hard inquiries.

It's really important that I got this one, because I couldn't have refiled since the SOL would have been up.

The incomplete and incorrect tri-merged reports - dismissed

Apparently, Judge Broomfield thinks that because ConsumerInfo.com isn't a CRA, the consumer disclosures don't need to be complete or accurate.

He thinks consumers get a "more complete" picture with their tri-merged. Well, like most people, he has no idea.

I'm not clear on why they don't have to provide complete and accurate consumer disclosures just because they're not a CRA. What are they?

Why are they exempt?

The snake oil scores - dismissed

That only got one paragraph - I really don't know what I could have done besides including the reports with the various scores, proving that they can't all be right and ConsumerInfo.com is selling snake oil.

So, in summary -

I don't know that I should worry about it. CreditExpert (Experian) just started selling the ConsumerInfo.com reports instead of Experian reports. It is bizarre.

Those reports are as incomplete as they come. I'm still suing Experian, and obviously I'll have to amend my complaint at some time.

ConumerInfo.com is sued as Experian in the class action, it's really all the same.