2004 Credit Suit

OUCH - it's official: identity theft

I kept wondering why Kallcents sounded so familiar, it's a sister company associated with Faxaway. So I called them, the charge is NOT related to Faxaway (which bills as Faxaway not Kallcents) and apparently somebody tried to get a $100 authorization for a prepaid calling account.

The order was declined because the address did not match my billing address. And THAT is probably why Cap One called, and not because of the charges.

HOWEVER, the Kallcents order was placed with one of my dormant addresses - that's the scary part.

So, I've been trying to rationalize what's going on, but I can only figure out what's NOT going on:

It's not a random card # theft
It's not theft by a vendor or anywhere I've used that card because they would have used the RIGHT address.
It's not someone who reads my web sites. Not only do I not post full account numbers for open accounts, but this address isn't posted anywhere.
It's not someone in my household because my dog doesn't place any orders.
It's highly unlikely that someone "broke in" and stole the info but left everything else. The dog's been watching the place too.

Deputy Allen just returned my call to the Sheriff:

He immediately asked whether I've ordered on the internet before, and since I've ordered literally hundreds of times, he concluded that this is how my card # was stolen.

I think it's really odd that someone who I ordered from would not use the CORRECT billing address, which they obviously have because otherwise the order would have been declined.

Additionally, most orders are through Ebay and I use PayPal. While there are a lot of bad things about PayPal, the real GOOD part is that the sellers do NOT get your creditcard # - only PayPal has it. That eliminates most, but not all online purchases.

He really didn't want to investigate this, telling me that unless I have a suspect, there's nothing he can do.

I asked him whether it wasn't up to them to do an investigation!

This is so simple. I assume that just about all companies who offer credit card processing log the IPs (as I do for every posting) and if this really was just some conartist who got my info on the net, I'm not worried.

HOWEVER, if this was someone locally, I need to know who that was.

Most companies also require that 3 digit number on the back of the card, and I want to know if s/he had that.

So far, the only people I can think of who have both the address AND my credit card number are Trans Union, Equifax and their lawyers. But they don't have the expiration date.

Also noteworthy is the fact that nobody at Capital One advised that I should do ANYTHING whatsoever other than to wait for the new card to arrive and not to use the old number anymore.

Fraudulent charges on my Cap One account?

Got the call that I frequently get from Cap One about suspicious activity.

Looks like this time there are some charges that aren't mine. Nothing big, $30 from Vertex and $100 from Callcents and a $54.50 charge that could be a recurring charge if there was a name change at my web host.

Interestingly, none of these companies provide a # to call.

Even more interesting, Cap One apparently monitors for telephone related charges.

Isn't it AMAZING how much effort they put into fraud loss prevention, but they can't provide accurate credit reporting?

What a difference the damages make. If more people sued Cap One for their inaccurate and incomplete credit reporting, they'd implement some procedures to ensure compliant reporting real quick!

Nelnet acquired 50% of collection firm

Going through old e-mail, I just found this announcement. How odd.

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

January 30, 2004 — LINCOLN, NE - Today, Nelnet, Inc. (NYSE: NNI) announced it has acquired fifty percent of Premiere Credit of North America, LLC. Headquartered in Indianapolis, Indiana, Premiere Credit is a collection firm specializing in past due debts and accounts receivables for a number of companies nationwide, including those related to higher education and medical care.

Premiere Credit joins Nelnet's existing lines of business in education finance and was recently recognized with a Growth 100 Award by the Johnson Center for Entrepreneurship and Innovation at Indiana University's Kelley School of Business.

"Premiere's successful growth strategy and experience in higher education debt management complements Nelnet's focus on keeping student loan default and delinquency rates low," commented Steve Butterfield, Nelnet Vice Chairman and Co-CEO. "Nelnet looks to gain efficiencies in the debt management support we provide to our customers by integrating Premiere's services with our existing education finance operations."

Premiere will maintain its Indianapolis headquarters and co-founders David Hoeft and Todd Wolfe will continue to lead the company, which includes approximately 45 employees.

"From a Premiere perspective, we are very pleased to have developed this relationship with Nelnet," said David Hoeft. "We see this as a very positive blend of expertise, resources, and business objectives, affording us a more direct insight into the needs of our higher education customers."

Additional information regarding Premiere Credit and the company's recent recognitions is available at www.premierecredit.com.

Nelnet is one of the leading educational finance companies in the United States and is focused on providing quality student loan products and services to students and schools nationwide. With over $11 billion in total assets, Nelnet originates in excess of $2 billion for itself and its service partners annually, services more than $18 billion in student loans, and provides servicing software for an additional $27 billion in student loans. Nelnet ranks among the nation's leaders in terms of total student loan assets.

Nelnet offers a broad range of student loan and financial services and technology-based products, including student loan origination and lending, guarantee servicing, and a suite of software solutions. Our products are designed to simplify the student loan process by automating financial aid delivery, loan processing, and funds disbursement. Our services help to facilitate and streamline education finance for all involved in the industry, including student and parent borrowers, lenders, financial aid officers, guaranty agencies, governmental agencies, servicers, and the capital markets. Additional information is available at www.nelnet.net.

Information contained in this press release, other than historical information, may be considered forward-looking in nature and is subject to various risks, uncertainties, and assumptions. Should one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize, or should underlying assumptions prove incorrect, actual results may vary materially from those anticipated, estimated, or expected. Among the key factors that may have a direct bearing on Nelnet's operating results, performance, or financial condition are changes in terms of student loans and the educational credit marketplace, changes in the demand for educational financing or in financing preferences of educational institutions, students and their families, or changes in the general interest rate environment and in the securitization markets for education loans.

Source: Company Press Release

MIS Exhibit 20 + 21: My 11/4/02 procedures and permissible purpose request

This is REALLY interesting. For literally YEARS I have been asking Experian and CreditData SW for the permissible purposes of all inquiries, specificially of the soft inquiries.

The CRAs and their clients have been subjected to numerous permissible purpose suits due to the complete disregard by creditors and collectors for consumers' privacy rights. Since those illegal credit pulls come with $1,000 statutory damages, consumers ARE getting their checks even without attorneys.

I inspired literally hundreds of permissible purpose suits since I posted my $1,000 check in 12/01:

* Wells Fargo: SETTLED for $1,000 + deletion of UNAUTHORIZED inquiry

1/21/04: Crystal v. FNANB (Circuit City)
settled for $2,000 and deletion of the hard inquiries.

What's the point?

Because CreditData SW (MIS) & Experian don't disclose the permissible purposes such as promos, account reviews, etc., I didn't realize that the seven 2001 Experian Wells Fargo inquiries were NOT promos. I settled Wells Fargo's Equifax inquiry in 12/01, and I signed a settlement agreement settling ALL claims I had.

I'm sure those inquiries were A/Rs, I don't think there's been another WF inquiry since.

I definitely would not have settled with Wells Fargo for only $1,000 if Experian provided complete consumer disclosures.

The MIS Exhibit 21 (the last MIS exhibit) is the 5/1/03 (2003!!!!) printout from the Experian web site. This printout, dated AFTER MIS was served, is supposed to be their response to my procedures request?

What a PATHETIC attempt to disguise their failure to comply with the FCRA!

The scans:

MIS Exhibit 21: My 11/4/02 fax to Experian:

MIS Exhibit 21: The 5/1/03 printout of from the Experian web site

FTC investigating American Agencies - file your complaint

Steve had posted at http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/ripoff67729.htm that Craig Kauffman at 415-848-5111 with the FTC in San Francisco is investigating.

I called Craig Kauffman and submitted my complaint.

Mr. Kauffman emphasized that so many people call American Agencies to request verification/validation of the debt - but the LAW requires WRITTEN DISPUTES!

That's of course what I've been telling readers for years and the instructions for proper disputes are at http://forum.creditcourt.com/discus/messages/3318/3318.html in the American Agencies topic at the CreditCourt forum.

BEFORE you file your complaint with Mr. Kauffman, have your documentation ready - your WRITTEN dispute, and he needs the dates and a brief description of your dispute.

He is looking for credit reporting AFTER the verification/validation request.

It's really important that you dispute FACTUALLY with the CRAs and if American Agencies reports the dispute instead of deleting, you need to order your FICO report to find out if it's still affecting your credit as it often does.

I gave him the URL with the part of my law suit relevant to American Agencies:

http://forum.creditcourt.com/discus/messages/803/3125.html

I'm sure glad that the FTC is actively investigating!

My fax to McAfee's attorneys, notice of press release

I'm STILL waiting for any kind of investigation by the FRB Richmond and their Senior VP and General Counsel James McAfee, have heard NOTHING since I submitted my 3/2/04 filing and exhibits.

James McAfee's actions are the definition of evil. He actively supports Capital One and refuses to enforce the law. And his attorneys Maureen Welsh and Thomas Maraz with Gallagher & Kennedy are just as guilty of destroying many lives of hardworking good people.

Maureen Welsh and Thomas Maraz chose to increase their personal wealth by defending pure EVIL.

If it wasn't for the evil attorneys, consumers would obviously do a lot better in the courts.

Saddam Hussein suppressed dissent with chemical weapons and an army of brutal henchmen. Of course many of the killers and torturers had an excuse: they had no choice. Their lives and the lives of their families were threatened.

In America, the corporate lawyers took the job. Nobody threatened them. They volunteer - for the money.

If the lawyers had a conscience and refused to take these cases, evil wouldn't have chance.

If there is anything like hell, that's where they'll end up. But that doesn't help people like me NOW, we pay our bills on time and get declined and pay higher interest and insurance because Capital One doesn't report the credit limits and subsequently our credit scores are lowered.

So I'll send out a press release about Mr. McAfee and his legal team. The Bank One press release has been accessed 16,660 times now and the media picked it up 618 times.

If there's anyone left in America who doesn't worship money and cares enough to do something about the exploitation of the disadvantaged, maybe this is the way to find them.

Here is my renewed complaint and notice of press release to McAfee's legal team:

Christine Baker
(deleted)
Tel: (206) 202-4653
Fax: (571) 222-1000
Email: christine@bayhouse.com

Maureen A. Welsh
Thomas A. Maraz
Gallagher & Kennedy, P.A.
2575 East Camelback Road
Phoenix, Arizona 85016–9225

Via fax to 602-530-8500 -- 2 pages

March 28, 2004

Re: My FRB-R and James McAfee complaint about Capital One, CIV-03-525-PCT-RCB
Notice of press release

Dear Ms. Welsh and Mr. Maraz:

I hoped to finally receive a substantive response to my complaint with the FRB-R and Mr. McAfee. However, I have received absolutely NOTHING.

Please advise whether any of Mr. McAfee’s contact information changed, as I am preparing a press release about his vile conduct and his continued active support of the exploitation of America’s disadvantaged by refusing to take the actions necessary to get Capital One to comply with the FCRA.

And just in case Mr. McAfee is still confused, here is my complaint again:

Re: Capital One refusal to report the credit limits in violation of the FCRA

Capital One refuses to report the credit LIMITS to the CRAs, apparently for all credit card accounts and in violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA).

Because Fair Isaac's credit scoring software utilizes the "High Credit" instead of the "Credit LIMIT" for Capital One accounts, the Balance/Limit Ratio calculated by Fair Isaac's software is obviously often MUCH higher than it should be.

Example:

A consumer with only one revolving account with a $5,000 credit limit and a $250 balance has a 5% B/L ratio.

If this account is a Capital One account, reported with a "High Credit" of $250, the B/L ratio is 100%. The credit scores can easily be lowered over 50 points due to Capital One's refusal to report the credit LIMIT.

Enormous damages are inflicted on many millions of Americans. Aside from credit declines and higher interest rates, many consumers can no longer afford insurance or are declined for insurance due to their low credit scores.

Ultimately, many consumers are forced into bankruptcy as a direct result of higher interest and insurance rates due to the low credit scores.

In many cases, those scores are low NOT because of late payments, but because of Capital One's policy not to report the credit LIMITS to the credit bureaus in violation of the FCRA.

FCRA § 623. Responsibilities of furnishers of information to consumer reporting agencies [15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2]:

"(a) Duty of furnishers of information to provide accurate information.

(2) Duty to correct and update information. A person who

(A) regularly and in the ordinary course of business furnishes information to one or more consumer reporting agencies about the person's transactions or experiences with any consumer; and

(B) has furnished to a consumer reporting agency information that the person determines is not complete or accurate, shall promptly notify the consumer reporting agency of that determination and provide to the agency any corrections to that information, or any additional information, that is necessary to make the information provided by the person to the agency complete and accurate, and shall not thereafter furnish to the agency any of the information that remains not complete or accurate."

Because the FCRA does not allow consumers to sue for Section a) violations, and only the "regulators" may enforce these regulations, I am asking you to enforce the requirement for accurate and complete credit reporting.

Exhibit AN is my 2/27/04 credit report with the Balance/Limit Ratio calculations for credit scores and illustrates the destructive impact of missing credit LIMITS on FICO scores.

James McAfee’s affidavit implies that my 11/12/02 complaint exceeded his mental capabilities.

If Mr. McAfee is still unable to comprehend any words, concepts or calculations, I will gladly provide explanations.

I have successfully explained the importance of the balance/limit ratio and the reporting of the correct credit limits to readers who barely spoke English and/or with very little education.

I am looking forward to a substantive reply.

Very truly yours,

Christine Baker
Christine@bayhouse.com

c: posted at CreditCourt.com and CreditSuit.org

Bank One news release: 9,514 times accessed and 387 media pickups

That's really impressive for $41!

I've been talking about press releases for a year, but just been so busy and it does take some reading and learning how to do this.

You can actually submit those releases at no cost at http://prweb.com/, but as you increase your voluntary contributions, you get added features such as stats, the ability to attach files and inclusion at eMediaWire.com for additional distribution:

http://emediawire.com/releases/2004/3/emw113432.htm

Press Release: Randy v. Bank One

Consumer sues Bank One/First USA for Deliberate Violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act

PRweb.com has a real nice program and it is very affordable. I paid $41 and as of right now it has been viewed 4,324 times and it was picked up 181 times by media outlets.

PR Web: "This number estimates the number of times your press release was picked up by a media outlet. This does not tell you how many times your story appears in the media. It simply represents an enhanced interest in your story by a media outlet."

Well good. They're looking, and while the media has been refusing to cover credit scoring (too complicated), maybe this is simple enough to get some coverage.

I also added the scans of the reporting to the release, am hoping that will help readers understand the issue.

It's not just about Randy, it's about the fact that Bank One INSISTS that their reporting of discharged balances is ACCURATE.

Obviously, the purpose of a Ch. 7 is to ELIMINATE the debt, and therefore any reported balance is false.

From the news release:

"Is Bank One retaliating against consumers who discharged their debts? Or are they part of the organized effort by the credit bureaus, Fair Isaac and Capital One Bank to artificially lower the credit scores of a large percentage of Americans through incomplete and incorrect credit reporting?"

THAT is the billion dollar question.

"8 24 MAR - CAPITAL ONE MONTHLY MEMBER FEE 4.00"

I've had my Capital One Kmart account with a $7,000 limit for almost 2 years.

Now they started charging a MONTHLY $4 fee.

WHY are they doing that? People who don't use the card will forget to make a payment.

Turn $4 into $39, + of course finance charges.

I want to close that account so bad. But then what? I'll get an even lower FICO score: Higher balance/limit ratio, if I get an account to replace it I have a negative NEW account, more inquiries, lower average age of accounts, etc.

I can't win. It's the lose - lose situation

Thank you, America!

The Law Offices of H. Michael Torrey - debt elimination

He e-mail spams and promises debt elimination w/o bk in 90 days. He charges $1,200 for "online support" and offers a $200 referral fee.

I'm sure it's another scam, he sure comes off as a moron in his SPAM, would like to hear from readers who tried that.

He is located in Belmont Shore, CA.

Please also see http://www.lawguru.com/cgi/bbs/attyPages/mikelaw.html and http://www.geocities.com/ice_mikey_mike/mikelaw.html

Very scary!!!

3/16/04 Experian/Jones Day letter - I have NO idea what's going on

Courtney Vaudreuil with Jones Day, the Experian and CIC legal team, replied to my 2/28/04 letter, Exhibit AN

Her reply is scanned below and she confirms that "... you are not able to dispute items over the internet, ..."

Why IS that? Why can't I dispute on the net and on the phone like everybody else? Why are all the CRAs retaliating?

I have no idea what she is saying in the second paragragh, whether my questions are about Experian or the ConsumerInfo.com report. I really don't give a rat's ass that "Consumerinfo.com is a separate corporate entity from Experian." I had questions about the 2/27/04 CIC report, my Exhibit AN-3.

Why can't I get any answers? Why is she acting like she doesn't know which report I'm talking about?

She HAS the exhibits, they were mailed WITH my letter!

I had sent questions about the CIC privacy policy directly to CIC, and she wrote on 1/13/04 that I need to send questions to her (see the scan below). So I did, and now THAT!

Then she gives me a lecture on discovery and assures me "I am willing to help you resolve any alleged inaccuracies on either your Experian credit file or Consumerinfo.com report. However, as we are currently in litigation, my treatment of this matter must follow the appropriate rules and procedures set forth under Federal and local laws."

She's telling me to (deleted) off. Just great. Of course they're ALL telling me to (deleted) off. They're so skilled.

And she's asking for DOCUMENTS to prove that Trans Union claims that CIC is altering their data.

Of course all I have is the telephone recording from Lisa at TU and the transcript, Exhibit P-3. Haven't posted the transcript yet, but here's the audio file. Sorry it's such a large file, 1.5 mb, maybe somebody can make that a little smaller?

I wonder if they expect me to die or something.

They know exactly how screwed up their credit reports are, they know that I can prove it, why aren't they AT LEAST trying to look like they're concerned with their FCRA non compliance?

This sure explains why most Americans are living in a daze, drugged, drunk and watching TV. It's tough to want to deal with this reality. It seems like the only functioning brains are working for evil corporation, trying to make sure nobody wants to think.

The 3/16/04 letter:

The 1/13/04 letter:

Docket update

I was beginning to wonder whether my request for extension of time made it to the court.

Sure hope that extensions aren't only for defendants!

3/3/04 146 Notice of ERRATA by dft Federal Reserve Bk R, dft James
McAfee re Motion for Summary Disposition and re
Supplemental Memorandum [144-1] re Defendants' Motion for
Summary Disposition that these documents incorrectly stated
that Plaintiff's Response to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss
was due 1/2/04 when it was actually due 1/20/04 (sat)
[Entry date 03/04/04]

3/3/04 147 RESPONSE (titled "Reply") by pla to Motion to Dismiss
Plaintiff's Complaint as to dft Federal Reserve Bk R, dft
James McAfee by dft Federal Reserve Bk R, dft James McAfee
[98-1] and to 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 03/04/04]

3/9/04 148 MOTION (Request) for Extension of Time until 4/14/04 to
Respond to the Merchants Information Solutions (Creditdata
Southwest) Motion for Summary Judgment by pla [148-1] (sat)
[Entry date 03/11/04]

3/9/04 149 Memorandum and RESPONSE by pla to Motion to dismiss case
and memorandum of points and authorities by dfts Equifax
Credit Information Services, Tom Chapman [103-1] (sat)
[Entry date 03/11/04]

3/17/04 150 REPLY by dft Equifax Credit, dft Tom Chapman to response
to motion to dismiss case and memorandum of points and
authorities by dfts Equifax Credit Information Services,
Tom Chapman [103-1] (ld) [Entry date 03/18/04]

Riverview Auto Sales subscribes to the NCLC

Another postal service misdelivery. Some car dealers make an effort to comply when repo'ing and even subscribe to the Debt Collection and Repossession NCLC Reports.

A federal grand jury indicted five debt collectors on 37 counts of fraud

5 indicted in student loan fraud

Federal authorities say Robert Hazlett, 43, president of Valley Acceptance Corp., conspired with four employees to submit false applications for student loans in 1999 and 2000.

The loans generated $1 million in commissions for the employees, who allegedly reported the loans were in good standing so that the bogus applicants could qualify for even more loans.

..."

Criminals gained access to 1,400 Equifax credit reports

Criminals can get anyone's credit files through arrangements with any of the many thousands of people with access to credit files through legitimate companies. It happens all the time.

Please read my FTC filing for the simple solution to prevent this, the assignment of a user changeable PIN.

Credit breach too easy, consumer group says

"VANCOUVER -- A security breach that allowed criminals to gain access to 1,400 confidential credit files at Equifax Canada was a crime waiting to happen, the president of Consumer Federation Canada says.

"This could have been prevented," said Dan Barnabic, whose non-profit consumer advocacy group is lobbying the government to tighten regulations covering credit-reporting agencies.

Mr. Barnabic said that to access the credit reports at a credit-reporting agency such as Equifax, all a criminal needs to do is set up a front operation.

"You open up a business. Register it. Get your licence and get Bell Canada to put a phone in, in your company's name. Then you have all the accreditation you need. You register as a credit-granting business, like a mortgage company, and for a small fee you can start getting files.

"You can get credit information on just about anybody you want. You just need a name and address for someone to request their credit report.

"And with their credit report you get everything -- social insurance number, how much they've paid, how much they owe. You see exactly what someone has . . . It's so easy to obtain, it's amazing."

Equifax told 1,400 consumers earlier this month that their credit reports "were accessed by criminals posing as legitimate credit grantors."

The company said alerts have since been placed on the affected files, so that potential creditors will confirm a consumer's identity before agreeing to a transaction.

Mr. Barnabic said credit grantors are required by law to get written permission from a consumer before they access credit records maintained by companies like Equifax, or TransUnion Canada, the other national credit reporting agency.

But he said credit-reporting agencies trust credit grantors to do what they are required, and usually don't do any further checks themselves.

"We don't know how this crime at Equifax was done," Mr. Barnabic said, "but my guess is, and I'm just speculating, that someone set up [phony] companies, became members [with Equifax] and just started requesting the credit files.

"If they got a dozen people, maybe more, that posed as credit grantors.. . . Now you are armed to get anyone's report, anywhere in Canada. Then you can pull credit reports on anybody . . . that's the scam. That's probably what they did.

"To get 1,400 files, it cost the criminals about $8,000 or $9,000" in access fees.

"It's amazing how easy it would have been. And it may happen again tomorrow in Toronto or Montreal. It's so easy that it's frightening."

..."

The CRAs don't want PINs because they would lose out on all that business.

Evil greedy executives like CEO Thomas Chapman put their profits ahead of common sense.

I sure hope those 1,400 people all file mega law suits. The fraud alert is not only NOT helping, but it actually hurts them because they are likely to get declined and won't get any pre-approvals.

Court of Appeals docket Johnson v. Experian Info Sol, et al

The court of appeals docket:

General Docket
US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Court of Appeals Docket #: 03-1235 Filed: 2/27/03
Nsuit: 3320 P.I.: Assualt, Libel & Slander
Johnson v. Experian Info Sol, et al
Appeal from: Eastern District of Virginia at Richmond

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Lower court information:

District: 0422-3 : CA-02-523
Presiding Judge: Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge
Court Reporter: Gilbert F. Halasz, Official Court Reporter
Court Reporter: Maria Hewitt, coord
Date Filed: 7/25/02
Date order/judgment: 1/22/03
Date NOA filed: 2/20/03
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Fee status: Paid

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Prior cases:
None
Current cases:
Lead Member Start End
Consolidated:
02- 2326 02- 2327 4/18/03
Related:
03- 1235 03- 1029 2/27/03
02- 2326 03- 1235 2/27/03

Docket as of March 5, 2004 0:25 am Page 1

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

03-1235 Johnson v. Experian Info Sol, et al

LINDA JOHNSON Leonard Anthony Bennett
Plaintiff - Appellee FAX 757-930-3662
757-930-3660
Suite 201
[COR NTC RET]
LEONARD A. BENNETT, PC
12515 Warwick Boulevard
Newport News, VA 23608

Richard John Rubin
FAX 505-983-2050
505-983-4418
[COR NTC RET]
1300 Canyon Road
Santa Fe, NM 87501

v.

MBNA AMERICA BANK, NA Earle Duncan Getchell, Jr.
Defendant - Appellant FAX 804-698-2061
804-775-4319
[COR NTC RET]
William Harrison Baxter, II
FAX 804-698-2260
804-775-4323
[COR NTC RET]
MCGUIREWOODS, LLP
1 James Center
901 East Cary Street
Richmond, VA 23219-4030

EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS,
INCORPORATED
Defendant

EQUIFAX CREDIT INFORMATION
SERVICES, INCORPORATED
Defendant

TRANS UNION LLC
Defendant

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

Docket as of March 5, 2004 0:25 am Page 2

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

03-1235 Johnson v. Experian Info Sol, et al

2/27/03 Civil case docketed. (mst)

2/27/03 Docketing notice issued. [03-1235] (mst)

3/5/03 Amended notice of appeal filed in the District Court on
2/26/03. [03-1235] (mst)

3/6/03 Docketing statement filed by Appellant MBNA America Bank
[3748779-1]. T/S needed [Y/N]: y; T/S already on file?: y.
[03-1235] (mst)

3/6/03 Counsel of record form filed by Earle Duncan Getchell for
Appellant MBNA America Bank. (mst)

3/6/03 Counsel of record form filed by William Harrison Baxter for
Appellant MBNA America Bank. (mst)

3/7/03 Briefing order filed. [03-1235] Appellant(s) brief/joint
appendix due 4/16/03 for MBNA America Bank. (mst)

3/13/03 Positive disclosure statement filed by Appellant MBNA
America Bank. [03-1235] (mst)

3/17/03 Certification of ROA complete and retained in the District
Court. [03-1235] (mst)

3/18/03 Disciplinary proceedings notice issued to Appellee Linda
Johnson for cor & discl dflt. [03-1235] Document due by
4/2/03. (mst)

3/28/03 Counsel of record form filed by Leonard Anthony Bennett for
Appellee Linda Johnson. (mst)

3/28/03 Negative disclosure statement filed by Appellee Linda
Johnson [03-1235] (mst)

4/16/03 Brief and joint appendix filed by Appellant MBNA America
Bank. Copies of brief: 9; # brf pages: 66.
Sufficient[Y/N]?: y. SEALED vol.[Y/N]?: n. Copies of apx: 7
(vol. 1), 6 (vol. 2); # apx pages: 1019. 2-sided
copying[Y/N]?: y. Method of filing w/ court: cd. Date of
Service on parties: 4/16/03. Type of service on parties:
pm. Appellee brief due 5/19/03 for Linda Johnson. [03-1235]
(mst)

5/9/03 ORDER FILED [3785127] to extend time to file appellee(s)
brief until 5/30/03 [3785127-1]. Appellee(s) brief now due
5/30/03 for Linda Johnson. [03-1235] (mst)

5/28/03 Counsel of record form filed by Richard John Rubin for
Appellee Linda Johnson. (mst)

Docket as of March 5, 2004 0:25 am Page 3

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

03-1235 Johnson v. Experian Info Sol, et al

5/29/03 ORDER FILED [3796509] to extend time to file appellee(s)
brief until 6/16/03 [3796509-1]. Appellee(s) brief now due
6/16/03 for Linda Johnson. [03-1235] (dhb)

5/30/03 ORDER FILED [3796669] to extend time to file appellee(s)
brief until 6/30/03 [3796669-1]. Appellee(s) brief now due
6/30/03 for Linda Johnson. [03-1235] (dhb)

6/13/03 ORDER FILED [3805783] to extend time to file appellee(s)
brief until 7/14/03 [3805783-1]. Appellee(s) brief now due
7/14/03 for Linda Johnson. [03-1235] ~ [3805783] (mst)

7/9/03 Motion filed by Appellee Linda Johnson to extend time to
file appellee(s) brief until 7/25/03 [3819915-1].
[03-1235] ~ [3819915] (mst)

7/9/03 ORDER FILED [3819916] granting motion to extend time to
file e's br [3819915-1] Appellee(s) brief now due 7/25/03
for Linda Johnson. [03-1235] ~ [3819916] (mst)

7/25/03 Brief filed by Appellee Linda Johnson. Copies of brief: 8;
# brf pages: 84. Sufficient[Y/N]?: n. Need R36(c) motion
for inclusion of unpub opn from other circuit.
SEALED?[Y/N]: n. Method of filing w/ court: pm. Date of
Service on parties: 7/25/03. Type of service on parties:
pm. [03-1235] ~ [3829667] (mst)

7/29/03 Notice non-compliant brief filed by Appellee Linda Johnson.
Rule: 36(c) - format. [03-1235] ~ [3829669] Sufficient
brief due on 8/8/03 for Linda Johnson. (mst)

8/5/03 Motion filed by Appellee Linda Johnson to allow attachment
to brief as a supplement. Attachment tendered (Y/N): y
[3833507-1]. [03-1235] ~ [3833507] (mst)

8/5/03 ORDER FILED [3833868] granting motion to allow attachment
to brief [3833507-1] [03-1235] ~ [3833868] (mst)

8/5/03 Brief made sufficient by Appellee Linda Johnson. Number of
brf pages: 82. [03-1235] ~ [3833874] (mst)

8/11/03 Reply brief filed by Appellant MBNA America Bank. Copies
of brief: 8; # brf pages: 39. Sufficient[Y/N]?: y.
SEALED[Y/N]?: n. Method of filing w/ court: pm Date of
Service on parties: 8/11/03 Type of service on parties: pm
[03-1235] ~ [3837489] (mst)

Docket as of March 5, 2004 0:25 am Page 4

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

03-1235 Johnson v. Experian Info Sol, et al

9/19/03 Case tentatively calendared for oral argument
12/2/03-12/5/03 Place: Richmond, Virginia NOTIFY OF CONFLICT
BY: September 29, 2003. [99-2643, 03-1207, 99-7713, 99-4687,
01-4586, 01-4605, 01-4607, 03-4348, 03-4367, 02-1149,
02-1266, 02-1980, 02-2042, 02-2199, 02-2200, 03-1351,
03-1354, 02-2251, 02-2317, 02-2360, 02-2361, 02-2364,
02-2366, 02-2367, 02-2369, 02-2392, 02-2396, 02-2432,
02-2474, 02-4091, 02-4525, 02-4526, 02-4676, 02-4693,
02-4708, 02-4734, 02-4753, 02-4762, 02-4831, 02-4859,
02-4860, 02-4877, 02-4901, 02-4917, 02-4921, 02-4956,
02-4984, 02-7104, 03-14, 03-206, 03-1005, 03-1006, 03-1030,
03-1039, 03-1056, 03-1065, 03-1068, 03-1408, 03-1075,
03-1120, 03-1166, 03-1185, 03-1193, 93-1194, 03-1194,
03-1196, 03-1310, 03-1223, 03-1232, 03-1235, 03-1248,
03-1250, 03-1259, 03-1279, 03-1280, 03-1308, 03-1315,
03-1326, 03-1329, 03-1339, 03-1343, 03-1362, 03-1367,
03-1388, 03-1401, 03-1448, 03-1449, 03-1457, 03-1543,
03-1460, 03-1461, 03-1462, 03-1463, 03-1464, 03-1465,
03-1469, 03-1566, 03-1473, 03-1474, 03-1475, 03-1497,
03-1510, 03-1531, 03-1696, 03-1550, 03-1562, 03-1564,
03-1612, 03-1624, 03-1638, 03-1674, 03-4017, 03-4043,
03-4137, 03-4174, 03-4204, 03-4209, 03-4280, 03-4363,
03-4439, 03-6146, 03-6739] ~ [3856583] (psc)

10/14/03 Case calendared for oral argument. [03-1235] ~ [3869676]
(jc)

11/25/03 Supplemental authorities (FRAP 28(j)) filed by Appellee
Linda Johnson [3892877-1] [03-1235] (mst)

12/2/03 Supplemental authorities (FRAP 28(j)) filed by Appellant
MBNA America Bank [3895775-1] [03-1235] (mst)

12/4/03 Letter referencing record citations filed by Appellant MBNA
America Bank. [3896965-1] ~ [3896965] [03-1235] (mst)

12/4/03 Oral argument heard. Panel: Honorable William W. Wilkins,
Honorable William B. Traxler, Honorable Richard D. Bennett.
Courtroom Deputy: TDC. [03-1235] (jle)

12/22/03 Supplemental authorities (FRAP 28(j)) filed by Appellant
MBNA America Bank [3906193-1] [03-1235] (dhb)

12/31/03 Supplemental authorities (FRAP 28(j)) filed by Appellee
Linda Johnson [3909664-1] [03-1235] (aweb)

12/31/03 Supplemental authorities (FRAP 28(j)) filed by Appellant
MBNA America Bank [3910722-1] [03-1235] (dhb)

2/11/04 Published, authored opinion filed. Copies to all parties.
[03-1235] (mst)

2/11/04 Judgment order filed. Decision: AFFIRMED. EOD Date:
2/11/04. [03-1235] ~ [3931737] (mst)

Docket as of March 5, 2004 0:25 am Page 5

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

03-1235 Johnson v. Experian Info Sol, et al

2/18/04 Brief released to Lantagne for copies. Briefs released:
A's, E's and Reply. [03-1235] (ad)

2/20/04 A's Brief, E's Brief and Reply Brief returned by Lantange.
[03-1235] (ce)

2/25/04 Bill of costs filed by Appellee, Linda Johnson. [3940390-1]
[03-1235] (mst)

2/26/04 Reply requested from Appellee Linda Johnson to bill of
costs claim for appendix [3940390-1]. Reply due 3/3/04 for
Linda Johnson. [3940896-1] [03-1235] ~ [3940896] (mst)

3/3/04 Reply filed by Appellee Linda Johnson to reply [3940896-1]
[3943852-1] [03-1235] ~ [3943852] (mst)

3/4/04 ORDER filed awarding costs in the amount of $364.75.
[03-1235] ~ [3944205] (mst)

3/4/04 Mandate issued. [03-1235] ~ [3944208] (mst)

Docket as of March 5, 2004 0:25 am

The docket for Johnson, et al v. Experian Information, et al

Since Thomas v. TU has so many interesting filings, I'm also going to order some of the documents from this landmark MBNA jury verdict and the affirmed appeal.

The district court docket:

U.S. District Court

Eastern District of Virginia (Richmond)

CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 02-CV-523

Johnson, et al v. Experian Information, et al

Filed: 07/25/02
Assigned to: Judge Richard L. Williams
Jury demand: Plaintiff
Demand: $0,000
Nature of Suit: 320
Lead Docket: None
Jurisdiction: Federal Question
Dkt # in member case : is 3:02-cv-00531
Dkt # in member case : is 3:02-cv-00527
Cause: 15:1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act

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

LINDA J. SLATER Leonard Anthony Bennett
plaintiff [term 01/10/03]
[term 01/10/03] [COR LD NTC]
Leonard A. Bennett, P.C.
12515 Warwick Boulevard
Suite 201
Newport News, VA 23606
(757) 930-3660

LINDA JOHNSON Leonard Anthony Bennett
plaintiff (See above)
[COR LD NTC]

v.

EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, Mark Lawrence Glassman
INC. [term 01/05/04]
defendant (202) 879-3455
[term 01/05/04] [COR LD NTC]
Virginia Conklin Theis
[term 01/05/04]
(202) 879-5445
[COR]
Jones Day
51 Louisiana Ave NW
Washington, DC 20001
(202) 879-3939

MBNA AMERICA BANK, N.A. Earle Duncan Getchell, Jr.
defendant [COR]
William Harrison Baxter, II
(804) 775-4323


[COR LD NTC]
McGuireWoods LLP
1 James Ctr
901 E Cary St
Richmond, VA 23219-4030
(804) 775-1000

EQUIFAX CREDIT INFORMATION Melvin Alfred Todd
SERVICES, INC. [term 11/14/02]
consolidated defendant (202) 508-5862
[term 11/14/02] [COR LD NTC]
Kilpatrick Stockton LLP
607 14th St NW
Suite 900
Washington, DC 20005-2018
(202) 508-5800

John Anthony Love
[term 11/14/02]
(404) 815-6224
[COR LD NTC]
Kilpatrick Stockton LLP
1100 Peachtree St
Suite 2800
Atlanta, GA 30309
**NA**
(404) 815-6500

Adam Jason August
[term 11/14/02]
Below Address Terminated on 11/15/02
[COR LD NTC]
Kilpatrick Stockton LLP
11130 Sunrise Valley Dr
Suite 300
Reston, VA 20191
(703) 648-8500

TRANS UNION, LLC Stanley Paul Wellman
consolidated defendant [term 01/10/03]
[term 01/10/03] [COR LD NTC]
Mark Gregory Carlton
[term 01/10/03]
[COR]
Harman Claytor Corrigan &
Wellman
4951 Lake Brook Dr
Suite 100
Glen Allen, VA 23059
(804) 747-5200

Mark E. Kogan


[term 01/10/03]
[COR NTC]
Satzberg, Trichon, Kogan &
Wertheimer PC
1818 Market St
30th Fl
Philadelphia, PA 19103
***N/A***
(215) 575-7600



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

DOCKET PROCEEDINGS

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

DATE # DOCKET ENTRY

7/25/02 1 COMPLAINT - Filing Fee $150.00, Receipt #64490; jury demand
(rpiz) [Entry date 07/26/02]

7/25/02 -- Jury Trial Flag (rpiz) [Entry date 07/26/02]

7/26/02 -- SUMMONS(ES) issued for Experian Information and MBNA
America Bank; planitiff's attorney telephoned for pick-up
(rpiz)

8/19/02 2 SUMMONS Returned Executed as to Experian Information 8/1/02
Answer due on 8/21/02 for Experian Information (rpiz)

8/20/02 3 ANSWER to Complaint by Experian Information (Attorneys Mark
Lawrence Glassman, Virginia Conklin Theis) (rpiz)
[Entry date 08/21/02]

8/20/02 4 Financial Interest Disclosure Statement (Local Rule 7.1) by
Experian Information (rpiz) [Entry date 08/21/02]

8/28/02 5 Certificate of Compliance of the Secretary of the
Commonwealth as to MBNA America Bank; Answer due 9/17/02 for
MBNA America Bank (rpiz) [Entry date 08/29/02]
[Edit date 09/16/02]

9/17/02 6 ANSWER to Complaint by MBNA America Bank (Attorney William
Harrison Baxter II, Earle Duncan Getchell Jr.), (mful)
[Entry date 09/18/02]

9/24/02 7 SCHEDULING ORDER setting Pretrial Conference for 9:40
10/10/02 ; ( signed by Judge Richard L. Williams )
Copies Mailed: yes (jpea)

10/10/02 -- Deadline updated; RESET Pretrial Conference for 9:40
10/10/02 before Judge Richard L. Williams (jpea)

10/10/02 8 PRETRIAL ORDER filed Jury Trial date 9:30 1/21/03 ( signed
by Judge Richard L. Williams ) Copies Mailed: yes (jpea)
[Entry date 10/11/02]

10/10/02 -- Pre-Trial Conference held (jpea) [Entry date 10/11/02]

10/11/02 9 ORDER that civil cases 3:02cv523, 3:02cv527, and 3:02cv531
shall be consolidated for all purposes including the trial
on 1/21/03; clerk is directed to consolidate these three
cases under 3:02cv523 and the parties are directed to file
all future pleadings under 3:02cv523 only ( signed by Judge
Richard L. Williams ) Copies Mailed: yes [EOD Date:
10/11/02] (mful)

10/11/02 10 ORDER that the parties and counsel are directed to contact
the chambers of Judge Lowe within 5 days of receipt of this
order to schedule a settlement conference; see order for
additional details ( signed by Judge Richard L. Williams )
Copies Mailed: yes and to Judge Lowe [EOD Date: 10/11/02]

(mful)

10/11/02 -- Consolidated Member Case. Lead Case Number: 3:02 cv523
(mful)

10/11/02 -- Consolidated Lead Case (mful)

11/13/02 11 AGREED MOTION by Equifax Credit, Linda J. Slater to
Dismiss (khan)

11/14/02 -- So Ordered: granting [11-1] motion by Equifax Credit, Linda
J. Slater to Dismiss;this dismissal will not effect Pltf's
claims against the other co-defendant ( signed by Judge
Richard L. Williams ) Copies Mailed: yes (cgar)

11/25/02 12 MOTION by Equifax Credit for Adam August to Withdraw as
Attorney (cgar) [Entry date 11/26/02]

12/10/02 -- So Ordered: granting [12-1] motion by Equifax Credit for
Adam August to Withdraw as Attorney ( signed by Judge
Richard L. Williams ) Copies Mailed: yes (scoo)

12/19/02 13 JOINT MOTION by Linda J. Slater, MBNA America Bank by MBNA
America Bank, Linda J. Slater to Dismiss Counts 1 and 3
(scoo) [Entry date 12/23/02]

12/24/02 14 MOTION by MBNA America Bank for Summary Judgment on Count
II of Pltf's Complaint (cmcc) [Entry date 12/26/02]

12/24/02 15 MEMORANDUM by MBNA America Bank in support of [14-1] motion
by MBNA America Bank for Summary Judgment on Count II of
Pltf's Complaint (Exhibits in brown expandable) (cmcc)
[Entry date 12/26/02] [Edit date 12/26/02]

12/30/02 16 ORDER granting [13-1] joint motion by MBNA America Bank,
Linda J. Slater to Dismiss Counts 1 and 3, Count 1 and
Count III are dismissed without prejudice, this case shall
proceed on Count II ( signed by Judge Richard L. Williams )
Copies Mailed: yes [EOD Date: 12/30/02] (scoo)

1/7/03 -- Motion hearing as to Linda J. Slater, Experian Information,
MBNA America Bank, Equifax Credit, Trans Union, LLC [14-1]
motion by MBNA America Bank for Summary Judgment on Count
II of Pltf's Complaint set at 3:30 1/16/03 before Judge
Richard L. Williams (jpea)

1/9/03 -- Plaintiff's Memo. In Response to MBNA America Bank's Motion
for Summary Judgment rec'd and placed on left pending Order
before Court. (Exhibits placed in brown expandable) (thom)
[Edit date 01/09/03]


1/10/03 17 ORDER that Pltf's response time to Deft's Motion for
Summary Judgment on Count II of Pltf's Complaint is hereby
enlarged, Pltf's Memorandum in Opposition to MBNA America
Bank NA's Motion for Summary Judgement on Count II of
Pltf's Complaint is deemed timely filed ( signed by Judge
Richard L. Williams ) Copies Mailed: yes [EOD Date:
1/10/03] (cmcc)

1/10/03 18 RESPONSE by Linda J. Slater to [14-1] motion by MBNA
America Bank for Summary Judgment on Count II of Pltf's
Complaint by MBNA America Bank (cmcc)

1/10/03 19 ORDER that Pltf's name, Linda J. Slater, be changed to
Linda Johnson within the style and pleadings of this case.
(signed by Judge Richard L. Williams ) Copies Mailed: yes
[EOD Date: 1/10/03] (cmcc)

1/10/03 20 ORDER, Stipulation of Dismissal by Pltf. and Deft. that
this cause be dismissed as to Deft. Trans Union, LLC (
signed by Judge Richard L. Williams ) Copies Mailed: yes
[EOD Date: 1/10/03] (cmcc)

1/14/03 21 Witness list by MBNA America Bank (cmcc)
[Entry date 01/15/03] [Edit date 01/15/03]

1/14/03 22 Exhibit list by MBNA America Bank (cmcc)
[Entry date 01/15/03] [Edit date 01/15/03]

1/14/03 -- Exhibits received by MBNA America Bank (1 black binder in 2
sets) (cmcc) [Entry date 01/15/03]

1/14/03 23 Exhibit list by Linda Johnson (cmcc) [Entry date 01/15/03]

1/14/03 24 Witness list by Linda Johnson (cmcc) [Entry date 01/15/03]

1/14/03 -- Exhibits received by Linda Johnson (1 black binder in 2
sets) (cmcc) [Entry date 01/15/03]

1/15/03 25 MEMORANDUM by MBNA America Bank in support of [14-1]
motion by MBNA America Bank for Summary Judgment on Count
II of Pltf's Complaint (cmcc)

1/15/03 25 REPLY by MBNA America Bank to response to [14-1] motion by
MBNA America Bank for Summary Judgment on Count II of
Pltf's Complaint (cmcc)

1/15/03 26 Amended Witness list by Linda Johnson (cmcc)

1/15/03 -- Deadline updated; RESET Jury Trial for 9:30 1/21/03
before Judge Richard L. Williams (jpea)

1/15/03 27 Proposed Jury instructions by MBNA America Bank, and
diskette (cmcc)


1/16/03 28 Rule 26(a)(3) OBJECTION by defendant MBNA America Bank to
[26-1] witness list list by Linda Johnson (cmcc)

1/16/03 29 OBJECTION by defendant MBNA America Bank to [0-0] exhibits
received by Linda Johnson (cmcc)

1/16/03 30 Document(s) filed by plaintiff Linda Johnson, Pltf's
Proposed Deposition Summaries, in lieu of the actual
depositions excerpts of Edward Hughes, Trisha Furr, Tonya
Grimes and Julie Eldreth, in brown expandable (cmcc)
[Edit date 01/16/03]

1/16/03 31 Proposed Jury instructions by Linda Johnson, and diskette.
(cmcc) [Edit date 01/16/03]

1/16/03 32 Minute entry: IN OPEN COURT: Williams, J., Gilbert Halasz,
OCR. Parties by counsel. Matter came on for hearing on
Deft's motion for summary judgment. Arguments had. For the
reasons stated from the bench, Deft's motion granted in
part and denied in part. Order to enter.(30 mins.) (jpea)

1/17/03 33 ORDER granting in part, denying in part [14-1] motion by
MBNA America Bank for Summary Judgment on Count II of
Pltf's Complaint, it is ORDERED that Deft's motion is
granted as to Pltf's claim under 15 USC Section 1681s-2(a)
and denied as to Pltf's claim under 15 USC Section
1681s-2(b) ( signed by Judge Richard L. Williams ) Copies
Mailed: yes [EOD Date: 1/17/03] (cmcc)

1/17/03 34 OBJECTION by defendant MBNA America Bank to [30-1] by
Linda Johnson, Proposed Trial Exhibits, Exhibit 13. (cmcc)

1/17/03 35 Proposed Supplemental Jury instructions by MBNA America
Bank (cmcc)

1/17/03 36 MOTION by MBNA America Bank in limine (cmcc)

1/17/03 37 MOTION by MBNA America Bank in limine (cmcc)

1/21/03 38 NOTICE of filing deposition transcripts of Linda Johnson,
Sandra Scanlon, Tonya Grimes, Edward Hughes, Julie Eldreth
and Trisha Furr by MBNA America Bank (transcripts in
brown expandable) (scoo)

1/21/03 39 OBJECTION by plaintiff Linda Johnson to [35-1]
instructions jury by MBNA America Bank (cmcc)

1/21/03 40 Response by Linda Johnson to Deft's Written Objections to
Pltf's Proposed Jury Instructions. (cmcc)

1/21/03 41 MOTION by MBNA America Bank to Strike Pltf's Errata Sheet
(scoo)


1/21/03 42 MEMORANDUM by MBNA America Bank in support of [41-1]
motion by MBNA America Bank to Strike Pltf's Errata Sheet
(scoo)

1/21/03 43 MOTION by MBNA America Bank for Voir Dire Questions (scoo)

1/21/03 44 OBJECTION by defendant MBNA America Bank to ptf's
deposition summaries [30-1] by Linda Johnson (scoo)

1/21/03 45 Second List of Supplemental Proposed Jury instructions by
MBNA America Bank (diske in white envelope on left side of
case file) (scoo)

1/21/03 46 OBJECTION by defendant MBNA America Bank to [31-1]
instructions jury (scoo)

1/21/03 47 Minute entry: JURY TRIAL PROCEEDINGS: Williams, J., Gilbert
Halasz, OCR. Pltf w/Atty Leonard A. Bennett; and, Deft
by/Atty E. Duncan Getchell, Jr. Jury. Matter came on for
Jury Trial proceedings. Jury sworn and examined on voir
dire. Jury empaneled; sworn to try issues. Witnesses
excluded on motion of Deft. Motions before trial heard and
resolved by the Court. Opening statements had. Pltf adduced
evidence. Rested. Motion after Pltf rested heard and denied
by the Court. Deft adduced evidence. Rested. Motion after
Deft rested heard and denied by the Court. Evidence
concluded. Proposed jury charge discussed with counsel in
the absence of the Jury. Arguments had. Jury charged by the
Court. Objections and/or exceptions to the charge noted by
Pltf and Deft. Jury retired to deliberate at 3:35 p.m.
Inquiries of the Jury received and answered by the Court.
Jury returned verdict in favor of Pltf at 5:20 p.m. in the
sum of $90,300.00. Jury Polled at Deft's request. Jury
discharged. Clerk to enter judgment on the Jury Verdict.
All exhibits returned to counsel.(4 hrs., 30 mins.) (jpea)
[Entry date 01/22/03]

1/21/03 -- Jury Trial held (jpea) [Entry date 01/22/03]

1/21/03 48 JURY VERDICT FORM in favor of Pltf Linda Johnson in the
sume of $90,300.00. (jpea) [Entry date 01/22/03]

1/21/03 49 JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE in favor of Pltf Linda Johnson
against Deft MBNA America Bank in the sum of $90,300.00. (
signed by the Deputy Clerk per Judge Richard L. Williams )
Copies Mailed: yes [EOD DATE: 1/22/03] (jpea)
[Entry date 01/22/03]

1/22/03 -- Case closed (cmcc)

1/27/03 50 TRANSCRIPT for trial dates of 01/21/03; placed in brown
expandable. (cmcc) [Entry date 01/28/03]


1/31/03 51 Bill of costs in the amount of $1,998.73 by Attorney
Leonard A. Bennett for Linda Johnson (cmcc)
[Entry date 02/05/03] [Edit date 02/05/03]

1/31/03 52 MEMORANDUM of Law by Linda Johnson in support of [51-1] by
Linda Johnson; Supplemental Declaration of Leonard A.
Bennett received and attached 2/6/03. (cmcc)
[Entry date 02/05/03] [Edit date 02/07/03]

2/4/03 53 Renewed MOTION by MBNA America Bank for Judgment as a
Matter of Law (cmcc) [Entry date 02/05/03]

2/4/03 54 MEMORANDUM of Points and Authorities by MBNA America Bank
in support of [53-1] motion by MBNA America Bank for
Judgment as a Matter of Law (cmcc) [Entry date 02/05/03]

2/14/03 55 MOTION by MBNA America Bank to Defer Plaintiff's Motion
for Award of Costs, Expenses, and Reasonable Attorney's
Fees (cmcc) [Entry date 02/19/03]

2/14/03 56 MEMORANDUM by MBNA America Bank in support of [55-1]
motion by MBNA America Bank (cmcc) [Entry date 02/19/03]

2/14/03 57 OBJECTION by defendant MBNA America Bank to [51-1] Bill of
Costs by Linda Johnson (cmcc) [Entry date 02/19/03]

2/19/03 58 RESPONSE by Linda Johnson to [53-1] motion by MBNA America
Bank for Judgment as a Matter of Law by MBNA America Bank
(Exhibits in brown expandable.) (cmcc)
[Edit date 02/19/03]

2/20/03 59 Consent ORDER, it is hereby ORDERED that any award of
costs, expenses, or attorney's fees in this case shall be
deferred until after such time as MBNA's post-trial motion
and any further appeals that may be filed in this matter
are concluded; this Court retains jurisdiction to decide
these issues at that time ( signed by Judge Richard L.
Williams ) Copies Mailed: yes [EOD Date: 2/20/03] (cmcc)

2/20/03 60 NOTICE OF APPEAL OF [49-1] judgment order by MBNA America
Bank . FILING FEE $ 105.00 RECEIPT # 67202 Copies sent
to Linda J. Slater, Experian Information, MBNA America Bank,
Equifax Credit, Trans Union, LLC, Linda Johnson; TPO package
given out (cmcc) [Edit date 02/21/03]

2/21/03 -- Motion hearing as to Experian Information, MBNA America
Bank, Linda Johnson [55-1] motion by MBNA America Bank set
at 2:00 2/24/03, [53-1] motion by MBNA America Bank for
Judgment as a Matter of Law set at 2:00 2/24/03 before
Judge Richard L. Williams (jpea)

2/21/03 61 REPLY Brief by MBNA America Bank to response to [53-1]
motion by MBNA America Bank for Judgment as a Matter of Law
(cmcc) [Entry date 02/24/03]


2/24/03 62 Minute entry: IN OPEN COURT: Williams, J., Gilbert Halasz,
OCR. Parties by counsel. Matter came on for hearing on
Deft's post-trial motion for judgment as a matter of law.
Arguments had. For the reasons stated from the bench, Court
denied Deft's motion. Should an appeal be noted, a
supersedeas bond shall be posted in the amount of
$150,000.00. Order to enter.(30 mins.) (jpea)

2/25/03 63 ORDER denying [53-1] motion by MBNA America Bank for
Judgment as a Matter of Law, for reasons stated from the
Bench at a hearing on February 24, 2003 ( signed by Judge
Richard L. Williams ) Copies Mailed: yes [EOD Date:
2/25/03] (cmcc)

2/26/03 64 AMENDED NOTICE OF APPEAL OF [49-1] judgment order by MBNA
America Bank . Copies sent to Linda J. Slater, Experian
Information, MBNA America Bank, Equifax Credit, Trans Union,
LLC, Linda Johnson; TPO package mailed (cmcc)
[Entry date 02/27/03] [Edit date 02/27/03]

2/27/03 -- USCA Case Number Re: [60-1] appeal by defendant CASE
MANAGER: Merlene Smith-Taylor USCA NUMBER: 03-1235 (cmcc)
[Entry date 02/28/03]

2/28/03 65 TRANSCRIPT for dates of 02/24/03, post-trial motions,
before the Honorable Richard L. Williams, United States
District Judge (cmcc) [Entry date 03/03/03]

3/6/03 -- USCA Case Number Re: [64-1] amended appeal by defendant
CASE MANAGER: Merlene Smith-Taylor USCA NUMBER: 03-1235
(cmcc) [Entry date 03/10/03]

3/7/03 -- LETTER received from 4CCA requesting transmittal of
transcript in this matter (cmcc) [Entry date 03/10/03]

3/17/03 66 Certification of Completion sent to USCA re: [64-1] Appeal
by MBNA America Bank and [60-1] Appeal by MBNA America Bank
(walk)

3/18/03 -- Letter sent to all counsel that cost will be taxed on March
27, 2003. (jpea)

3/18/03 -- USCA Case Number Re: CASE MANAGER: Merlene Smith-Taylor
USCA NUMBER: 03-1235 (Transmittal of Certif.) (cmcc)
[Entry date 03/25/03]

3/21/03 -- Pursuant to Consent Order of 2/20/03, costs will not be
taxed at this time. (lmcd)

1/5/04 67 ORDER that the Complaint filed herein is DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE as to Experian Information Solutions ( signed by
Judge Richard L. Williams ) Copies Mailed: yes [EOD Date:
1/5/04] (cmcc) [Edit date 01/05/04]


2/11/04 68 Copy of Opinion of USCA re: [60-1] appeal by MBNA America
Bank, [64-1] amended appeal by MBNA America Bank Decided
February 11, 2004 AFFIRMED the District Court decision;
attached copy of judgment will not take effect until
issuance of the mandate. (cmcc) [Entry date 02/12/04]

2/11/04 69 JUDGMENT OF USCA (certified copy) with copy of opinion of
USCA AFFIRMED the judgment of the District Court re: [60-1]
appeal, [64-1] amended appeal (cmcc) [Entry date 02/12/04]

2/26/04 70 Stipulated ORDER that Plaintiff shall file and serve her
supplemental petition for attorneys' fees and costs within
28 days from issuance of the mandate from the United States
Court of Appeals ( signed by Judge Richard L. Williams )
Copies Mailed: yes [EOD Date: 2/26/04] (cmcc)

3/8/04 71 USCA Order as to plaintiff Linda J. Slater, the Court
awards $364.75 in costs. (cgar)

3/8/04 72 JUDGMENT OF USCA (certified copy) with copy of opinion of
USCA affirms the judgment of the District Court the
judgment of the District Court re: [64-1] appeal (cgar)

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

Case Flags:
CLOSED
LEAD
3:02
cv523

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
END OF DOCKET: 3:02cv523

Evil: John M. McIntyre, Reed Smith LLP

Mr. McIntyre is one of the attorneys representing Bank One/First USA in Randy's case.

John M. McIntyre

E: jmcintyre@reedsmith.com
T: 412-288-3822
F: 412-288-3063

Read his bio and you can guess why he chose to fight for evil.

Mr. McIntyre's first listed experience:

"Was lead trial attorney representing an indigent plaintiff in a civil rights matter before a jury in federal court. The jury returned a verdict in favor of our client that included an award of punitive damages and the damage award was upheld on appeal. Briscoe v. Sell, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, Civil Action No. 99-367."

He went on to defend multinational corporations including creditors, collectors and CRAs.

Excerpt:

"Co-tried a three week breach of contract action in state court, representing a large manufacturing company. The plaintiff in the case sought more than $3 million in damages for what it alleged was a wrongful termination of a contract for logistics services. The court issued a defense verdict on the plaintiff’s claim and awarded our client $83,832 on its counterclaim. Gruelle v. Leybold Vacuum USA, Inc., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Civil Division No. GD 02-8223.

Was the lead author of a brief to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit on behalf of our client, GMAC Residential Funding Corp., as well as seven other defendants-appellees in the case. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the trial court’s decision dismissing the plaintiffs’ claims that alleged that the defendants issued secondary mortgage loans with improper and excessive closing costs. Miller v. Pacific Shore Funding, 2004 Westlaw 144138.

Obtained a defense verdict in an arbitration action premised on allegations of commercial defamation. Stone et al. v. Experian Business Information Solutions, Inc., Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, November Term 1998, No. 1901.

Currently serving as the senior associate on more than 20 class actions for one of the largest nationwide purchasers of second mortgage loans in a series of alleged class actions asserting “predatory lending” claims.

Obtained summary judgment in several Fair Credit Reporting Act cases in Nevada, Virginia, Delaware, and Pennsylvania for a leading credit reporting agency.

Successfully compelled arbitration of a putative class action alleging statutory violations against a purchaser of second mortgages. Walther v. Sovereign Bank, Circuit Court of Baltimore County, Case No. 03-C-02-014006."

Why the change from civil rights to defending corporate greed?

My guess - it's the money. Obviously he's a very skilled attorney and a very bright guy.

He made the conscious choice to defend evil.

I hope that "something" will happen to him to make him realize that the money he makes is irrelevant and that all that counts is how many people he hurt, how much pain he inflicted on the poorest and most defensless human beings, how many people died because he dedicated his life to evil.

He's a young guy, he has a choice and he can change.

Thomas v. TU documents

I started scanning and posting the Trans Union Motion for a Protective Order and the Thomas Motion for Partial Summary Judgment.

I can't figure out WHY a corporation has a right to privacy. Does it get embarrassed?

How can a company in possession of all credit data for 200+ million people operate without having to provide financial statements to show that it has the resources to maintain the data in a secure environment and to compensate consumers for damages?

Many MILLIONS of people are having the same and even worse problems with Trans Union than Judy Thomas.

TU CEO Gambill sounded in his speech to Congress like Trans Union would go out of business if they had to provide free annual reports to consumers. Think about that! Trans Union doesn't have the resources to compensate consumers for their screw ups.

I'm sure that Trans Union would go bankrupt real fast if just 1% of consumers with legitimate claims took legal action.

The morons at XM radio

I posted a few days ago about their new policy to run the credit and compel binding arbitration and I had concluded that they must be having some problems - as promptly confirmed by a reader's comment.

Today I got this reply:

Dear Christine,

Thank you for contacting XM Satellite Radio, we apologize for the delay in our response.

Please email legal@xmradio.com in regards to our policies. They are better suited to respond to your concerns.

Should you require further assistance, please do not hesitate to call us toll free at 1-800-967-2346.

We appreciate your business and hope you'll continue to be a loyal and happy XM listener for many years to come.

Best Regards,
Audra Ekwulugo
Listener Care

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

So, why didn't Audra forward my mail to the legal department?

Obviously, to wear me out, to make me go away. Don't they realize that by aggravating me they'll only get MORE bad publicity?

c: emailed to legal@xmradio.com

The one year anniversary

On 3/19/03 I filed my complaint in Phoenix.

Now I wonder why the anti war demonstrations are tomorrow, I definitely remember coming back from Phoenix that evening and then my Dad called and told me that the bombing had started. When I was writing my complaint I was just trying to get it done before the war started, and it certainly was distracting.

A year later, nothing got better. Not in Iraq, not in the US, and certainly not in the credit world.

The CRAs all decided to disclose even LESS information, soft inquiries completely disappeared from most consumer disclosures. The PEOPLE running the CRAs are evil greedy bastards. Of course the same is true for just about any major corporation, politician, well, most people.

It's been a rough year, quite enlightening, but in a very negative way.

I don't think I was particularly naive about the flaws in the "justice" system and the extent of corruption everywhere, but nothing's like experiencing the lies and deceit first hand.

Few organizations or people are sincere about CHANGING credit reporting and ending the exploitation of the poor and disadvantaged. I subscribe to the ACORN newsletter, and they simply refuse to take on the CRAs. ACORN is part of the system.

ACORN helps the slaves polish their chains instead of fighting slavery.

Their activities are not useful without first changing credit reporting and scoring. What is the point of a predatory lending settlement resulting in a few hundred dollar settlement while the CREDIT REPORTING of these accounts results in THOUSANDS of dollars in damages due to higher insurance and interest rates?

It's like spending tons of money on medical care for illnesses due to contaminated water and NOT providing clean water. People will always be sick. Without eliminating the cause of the problem, nothing will change.

It is ACORN's objective to pacify the disadvantaged and exploited, to keep them from going berserk, to make it look like everything's ok and all we have to do is stage a little protest and all is fine.

It ain't so. And the ACORN executives know that. They thrive in the current conditions, the disadvantaged and poor even send them donations! It's absurd.

While I didn't think much of the FTC and other regulators prior to my filing, it sure amazes me that there is NOTHING consumers can do to get them to enforce the FCRA.

Many "consumer advocate" attorneys are also part of this system. I've seen more people screwed by their own attorneys than I've seen helped. The poorer or sicker the consumer, the more likely it is that they'll see less than 10% of the settlement. The "working relationships" between corporate and consumer attorneys ensure the payment of legal fees to the attorneys and next to nothing for the consumers.

There are a few people who truly care, but not many.

I learned so much this last year, but what's the point?

c: Lisa Donner acorncampaign@acorn.org
Camellia Phillips acornnews@acorn.org

Notice of press release Civil Action No. 03-1729 Foster v. Bank One

Christine Baker
http://www.creditsuit.org/
http://forum.creditcourt.com/cgi-bin/discus/
http://www.bayhouse.com/
christine@bayhouse.com
Fax: 571-222-1000

Perry A. Napolitano
John M. McIntyre
Jayme Butcher
Reed Smith LLP
Tel: (412) 288-3131
Fax: (412) 288-3063

Re: Notice of press release Civil Action No. 03-1729 Foster v. Bank One

March 18, 2004

Dear Bank One Legal Team:

March 18, 2004

Dear Bank One Legal Team:

Prior to sending out my press release about the Bank One (First USA) credit reporting practices, I am providing you with the opportunity to clarify a couple of issues:

1) The numerous Bank One credit inquiries without a permissible purpose.

Bank One seems to claim that it has a permissible purpose, but I have not been able to determine what that would be from your filings. It is my understanding that a consumer has to apply for credit or employment, there has to be a business relationship such as an open account or an outstanding debt to legally obtain a consumer credit report.

Since Mr. Foster did not apply for anything with Bank One and he has no open account and he does not owe Bank One, what exactly is the permissible purpose?

2) Is Bank One exempt from the FCRA requirement to report only complete and accurate credit data to the CRAs?

As dedicated readers of Mr. Foster's blog, you have probably read my comment at http://www.firstusa-credit-suit.us/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-comments.cgi?entry_id=68 and my Bankruptcy Affidavit at http://www.creditcourt.org/bk-affidavit.htm.

I have also documented some of the Bank One FCRA violations at http://forum.creditcourt.com/discus/messages/14/14.html, including several scans and I consider all documentation to be authentic. Please let me know if you disagree.

Based on your filings and the documentation submitted to me by Mr. Foster as well as many other former Bank One or First USA customers, I concluded that Bank One knowingly and routinely submits false and extremely damaging credit data to the CRAs. If there is a provision in the FCRA exempting Bank One from compliance with the FCRA requirement for complete and accurate credit reporting, please advise.

My tentative deadline is Monday evening. Would you like me to include specific contact info for your firm and/or Bank One?

Your reply is of course not required, but I strive for maximum accuracy in my publications.

Very truly yours,

Christine Baker

c: posted at http://www.creditsuit.org/blog/archives/000440.html

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

Faxed and confirmed receipt with Peggy.

Capital One ERC Dept Manager info

Chris Lane wrote again:

"Please replace with contact Capital One's Customer Relations Department."

That's the entire mail! Here's my reply:

"Fat chance! It looks to me like you just don't want your customers to be able to get to someone with a name.

You got promoted from Office Manager to ERC Dept. Manager, Regulatory Operations since your last mail, congratulations!

I'll update with your info.

Can you explain to me why Capital One is exempt from the FCRA and not reporting the credit limits?

Christine Baker"

Here's the info on the e-mail. Does anyone know what ERC stands for?

Chris Lane
ERC Dept. Manager
Regulatory Operations
968-3176 (tie 410)
chris.lane@capitalone.com

Chase and CRAs sued for incorrectly listing consumer as dead

Businessman sues after firms mistakenly list him as deceased

"HOUSTON - A businessman whose Social Security number was confused with his deceased mother's says a bank's mistake has cost him more than $250,000."

David Jokinen says that J.P. Morgan Chase Bank told credit bureaus Equifax, Trans Union and Experian Information Solutions that he was deceased. Two of the financial data companies stopped assigning Jokinen a credit score because they had him listed as dead.

Jokinen, without a credit score, could not refinance the mortgage on his Sugar Land home or qualify for a 0.9 percent loan to buy a used luxury car.

..."

Why does Jokinen have a lawyer?

Because he is a wealthy business man.

It's highly unlikely the suit would have been filed if he was just a working stiff.

I also find it interesting that the CRAs apparently ARE able to stop the scoring of a report. When I asked the CRAs not to score my reports anymore, they didn't respond.

FINALLY! WV AG sues Cross Country Bank!

Attorney general sues Applied

"... McGraw is asking the court to order the companies to stop violating state law, to pay each customer who has been a victim of its practices from $200 to $3,700 each and to fine the companies and Abessinio $5,000 for each violation. ..."

Why does McGraw want to fine Cross Country Bank and Applied Card Systems $5,000 for each violation, but the victims get only $200 to $3,700 each?

I think they should pay for the cost of the investigation, and if the AG has to make a profit, add 10% or whatever they need to make.

CCB customers have been been subjected to harrassment and illegal collection practices for many years.

"McGraw sued Cross Country Bank, its subsidiary Applied Card Systems and Rocco A. Abessinio, who owns both companies."

Don't know why the AG can sue a CEO but I can't.

"Googel said the attorney general’s office has received at least 200 consumer complaints against Applied Card and Cross Country since November 1997."

Only 200? How many THOUSANDS of complaints has the FTC received about the CRAs?

"McGraw’s suit is actually a response to a lawsuit Cross Country had filed against his office earlier this month. Cross Country sought to block McGraw’s use of private lawyers and information from a former employee’s affidavit in his office’s investigation of the company."

CCB sued the AG?

What are things coming to? CCB has been on my list of banks NOT to do business with for many years.

Rocco should go to the Grey Bar Hotel.

Can I go from house to house and take $50 here and few hundred there, year after year?

I don't think so.

Why can corporations steal our money and ruin our lives and the CEOs don't go to prison?

"Cross Country Bank "promotes its credit cards as a way for credit-impaired consumers to establish their credit rating,’’ according to the lawsuit. "Many consumers find, however, that their credit rating is worse after obtaining a CCB credit card."

The same is true for Capital One. At least CCB reports the credit limits.

Evil thugs like James McAfee at the Federal Reserve Bank know it and couldn't care less.

MIS Exhibit 12: 6-14-02 ACDV Capital One

Capital One VERIFIED and I really don't know what all the codes mean. But the "Metro Date" conincides with the "Present Status" and the "Status Date" on the report. And that SHOULD be no later than the discharged date in 96.

Questions for MIS:

The report states that the account will be reported until 5/2003. How is that date determined?

The Last Payment date on the ACDV is 8/95. That means that the account was delinquent in 9/95. How did CreditData SW calculate the date of deletion?

And "somewhere" has to be the date of the first permanent delinquency on the ACDV, am I just too tired and not seeing it?

Why is the status date 4/01?

The scan:

XM Radio now requires credit check

Insanity at it's finest. There is NO way that you can run up any kind of a bill!

The monthly fee is $12 or so, and the damages due to their credit inquiries could be hundreds or thousands of dollars.

And of course they have a binding arbitration clause. Why do they need that? Why would anyone sue them?

I suppose they overcharge their customers and fail to process cancellations just like the cell phone criminals.

I'm considering cancelling before I have those problems.

c: listenercare@xmradio.com

HUMOR: Capital One wants me to remove contact info

Chris Lane, Office Manager in the Executive Offices of Capital One, sent me an e-mail today, requesting that I delete the name of Tanya Morris in the Executive Offices and her contact number at CreditForum.org.

Capital One is asking ME to delete????!!!!

That was good for a badly needed laugh!

My reply: "I'll be happy to update with new contact info. What would you like me to post?"

Why the world hates America

It never ceases to amaze me how ignorant most Americans are, so I thought maybe this graphic presentation adds a little awareness of what's really going on.

These pictures have been shown in documentaries throughout the world. Europeans are especially aware of the destruction and suffering in Kosovo. And while I can understand that many Americans simply don't care about people in other countries, I can't understand why they won't even care about their own soldiers and their families.

Do you know that America doesn't even provide medical care for all its own troops?

For years, the veterans with Gulf War Syndrom were refused treatment and they were categorized as lazy deadbeats. Recently Congress investigated the lack of medical care for soldiers returning injured from Iraq.

From the Dennis Kucinich page on depleted uranium:

"...

A recent study shows that U.S. Gulf War veterans' children have a much higher likelihood of having three specific types of birth defects: two types of heart valve abnormality occurring to children of male veterans, and genital-urinary defects to children born of female veterans. A study of British veterans of the Gulf War, Bosnia, and Kosovo reveals that they have 10 to 14 times the usual level of chromosomal abnormalities.

A Canadian medical research facility recently found that the urine of Afghani people living near the area where the United States carried out military operations contained radioactive isotopes 100 to 400 times as high as Gulf War veterans from the United Kingdom who were tested in 1999. The Canadian team recorded an average of 315.5 nanograms of these isotopes in people in Jalalabad, Tora Bora, and Mazar-e-Sharif. A 12-year-old boy near Kabul tested at 2,031 nanograms. The maximum exposure considered safe by the United States is 9 nanograms/year. With growing evidence of an increase in birth defects and stillborns, the situation should be addressed as an issue of the highest priority.

..."

Who cares?

10% of Households subjected to incorrect credit reporting after bankruptcy

One in 73 US households declared bankruptcy in '03

"WASHINGTON, March 12 (Reuters) - One out of every 73 U.S. households filed for bankruptcy last year, a record high, despite historically low interest rates, the American Bankruptcy Institute said on Friday.

The institute said Utah faced the highest per-household bankruptcy rate -- one out of every 47 -- followed closely by Tennessee, Georgia and Nevada. Alaska had the lowest rate last year, just one filing for every 189 households.

"Despite enjoying the sustained benefit of low interest rates, growing numbers of U.S. consumers are facing difficulty in meeting their monthly obligations," ABI Executive Director Samuel Gerdano said.

..."

Just about ALL filers are subjected to INCORRECT credit reporting. Few creditors bother to comply with the FCRA requirement to UPDATE their reporting after the discharge.

Unscrupulous creditors such as First USA/Bank One refuse to correct their reporting even when consumers dispute.

My estimate of 10% is probably low, as I averaged over 7 years, but often accounts are re-aged, resulting in discharged accounts staying on the credit reports even longer.

A typical example is the First USA reaged account The bankruptcy was filed in 1998, but First USA changed the Date of Last Activity for Equifax to 3/2003. Bank One (First USA) also deliberately reports delinquent balances for discharged accounts.

Not only will the derogatory account be reported until 2010, 12 years after the discharge, but it severely lowers the FICO credit scores because the account is rated as a NEW defaulted account.

Additionally, many people get divorced during/after bankruptcy and they are likely to remarry someone who has (not yet) filed for bankruptcy. Because rates are usually based on the lowest credit scores, one divorced/remarried couple often turns into 2 households negatively affected by the "after bankruptcy" incorrect credit reporting.

The FTC on reasonable procedures - Section 607(b)

Since I was looking at the FTC published opinion letters, and the lack of reasonable procedures are a significant part of my claims against the CRAs, I'll summarize the FRC publications:

Lovern (04-24-98)

"...

Section 607(b) of the FCRA requires credit bureaus "to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information concerning the individual about whom the report relates." In our view, it is not a reasonable procedure to label an account that has been discharged in bankruptcy as "charged off as bad debt" if the account was open and not charged off when the consumer filed bankruptcy. Such a designation would be inaccurate or misleading, because it would indicate that the creditor had written off the account at the time of bankruptcy when it had not in fact done so.

..."

LeBlanc (06-09-98):

This letter is about whether a company assembling criminal records is a CRA - not applicable to my situation.

Harris (03-22-99)

"... Section 623(a)(2) of the FCRA addresses the duty to correct and update information by "furnishers," or persons who furnish information to consumer reporting agencies ("CRA") such as credit bureaus. In particular, this section requires a person that "has furnished to a consumer reporting agency information that the person determines is not complete or accurate" to "promptly notify the consumer reporting agency of that determination" and provide any information needed to make it complete and accurate.(1) Thus, on its face, this provision requires a furnisher to provide corrected or updated information to the consumer reporting agency that it had reported to originally. A furnisher that reports current information to a different CRA has done nothing to "correct and update information" with CRA that possess the information that the furnisher has now determined is incomplete or erroneous. This duty extends to all student loan accounts reported to CRAs, regardless of whether they were accurate at one point, because the section requires the furnisher both to "update" accounts as well as to "correct" those that were erroneous when submitted to the CRA.

Section 607(b) of the FCRA requires CRAs to "follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of information" in their consumer reports. It is our view that a CRA that refuses to accept updated and corrected information from a furnisher on student loan accounts, if it still maintains that information in its database, does not have in place "reasonable procedures" to comply with this section with respect to such accounts.

..."

This letter is very important because it clearly establishes that an account that was charged off PRIOR to a Ch. 7 discharge MUST be updated to reflect the subsequent discharge.

It also implies that a CRA REFUSED to accept updates, I'd sure like to know who that was.

McCorkell (06-03-99)

"Dear Mr. McCorkell:

This responds to your letter concerning the application of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ("FCRA") to an account that is reported to a consumer reporting agency ("CRA") by a creditor, when the account is discharged in bankruptcy and charged off by the creditor, either before or after the discharge. You note that a staff opinion letter (Lovern, 4/24/98) stated that a credit bureau would violate Section 607(b) of the FCRA if it reported a discharged item as a chargeoff when it was in fact not charged off. You state that (contrary to a comment attributed by Mr. Lovern to a Fair Isaac source in his letter to us) your risk scores assign the same number of points to a bankrupt tradeline regardless of whether that account is also reported as charged off.

Specifically, you ask if we concur in your view that "nothing in the FCRA (a) prohibits a creditor from 'charging off' an account, whether before or after the filing of a bankruptcy; (b) prohibits a creditor from reporting to a CRA that an account which has been discharged in bankruptcy has also been charged off so long as the credit grantor has in fact charged off the account; or (c) or prohibits a CRA from reporting an account which has been discharged in bankruptcy as also having been charged off if the creditor has so reported the account to the CRA and the CRA has no reason to believe otherwise." We agree that the FCRA prohibits none of those practices in the circumstances you describe.

The opinions set forth in this informal staff letter are not binding on the Commission." [emphases added]

Watkins (06-24-99)

This is about the obligations imposed by Section 623(a) on furnishers of information to CRAs and the responsibilities of CRAs under Section 607(b).

"Section 607(b) was not changed by the CCRRA. It remains in the same form as when the FCRA became law on October 26, 1970. Congress left Section 607(b) intact when it rewrote the FCRA in 1996, and on several other occasions when it amended the statute over the years. Despite some deficiencies in Section 623(a) from the consumer perspective, it does impose accuracy duties on furnishers where none existed prior to the effective date of the CCRRA. Nothing suggests that, in prescribing obligations for furnishers for the first time, Congress intended to change CRA duties under Section 607(b). Therefore, it is our view that the duties of CRAs under Section 607(b) were neither expanded nor reduced by the addition of Section 623 by the CCRRA.

The opinions set forth in this informal staff letter are not binding on the Commission."

It is important that none of these letters are binding and that they are from the 90s.

Thank Bush for selling consumers out to international conglamerates!

1/26/04: My reply to the FTC/FCC motion to dismiss + exhibits

The scum at FUSA/Bank One ....

It's UNBELIEVABLE what they're coming up with.

Check out Randy's posting and my comment.

From the FTC letter to Fair Isaac: "You state that (contrary to a comment attributed by Mr. Lovern to a Fair Isaac source in his letter to us) your risk scores assign the same number of points to a bankrupt tradeline regardless of whether that account is also reported as charged off."

The FTC Lovern letter

I want to know why McCorkell (Fair Isaac) wrote that letter.

That the FUSA/Bank One legal team would take this letter to try to justify their extremely damaging credit reporting is just outrageous.

I know they ROUTINELY report discharged accounts with the balances and without the discharge notation.

Just like Capital One doesn't report the credit limits, First USA/Bank One is DELIBERATELY reporting incorrect data with the INTENT to damage consumers.

They should be part of the RICO action.

Sue, people, sue!!!

MIS Exhibit 12: 5-29-02 ACDV Providian

That's an E-oscar Automated Consumer Dispute Verification, a little different layout.

Notice the "FCRA DOFD" - that's the Date of first delinquency, this most important date used to age derogs off the reports.

A few months ago, Experian STOPPED disclosing this date to consumers. Trans Union NEVER disclosed it, and I have been unable to determine how TU accounts are aged. Ms. Lewis, their attorney, gave me an INCORRECT data when I first asked about this during my 2001/02 small claims suit.

I disputed the Providian account because of this weird bk notation: "Discharged Through BK Ch 7, 11, or 12 07/31/1996 to 03/29/2002" and I *hoped* that having them look at all data would get this fixed. This was also after Thomas Quinn at Fair Isaac wrote that every piece of data has to be correct.

As I'm looking at the CDV, it looks like this stupid bk notation might have something to do with the Experian STATUS date.

Looking at these disputes and the results, it's becoming clear that a consumer cannot possibly properly dispute without access to the ACDVs as well as an explanation of the codes.

It sure is odd that the due date was 5/9/02 and Providian didn't respond till 5/28/02.

It looks like the "due date for the creditor to complete the investigation is much less than 30 days.

And what's the "97 07-09-96" notation? Who wrote that and what does it mean?
The ACDV scan:

MIS Exhibit 8: 10/30/01 CreditData reporting of American Agencies (Pac. Bell)

The account was re-aged to be "on record until 11/2004." However, the account went permanently delinquent in 12/96, after Pacific Bell had failed to credit my November payment to my account. I never brought the account current again.

Most likely, Pacific Bell (SBC) re-ages all collections to the date service is shut off.

They also turned the account into a joint account when it was NOT a joint account. The final bill has only MY name on it and nobody else was ever on this account. Scumbags at Pacific Bell!!!

The scan:

MIS Exhibit 8: 10/30/01 CreditData SW refusal of American Agencies (Pac. Bell)

That was a HUGE screwup by CreditData SW, one of those truly life altering events.

If they hadn't refused my "not legit - please remove" dispute, and they had deleted the account, I most likely would have never had to sue American Agencies, I might have never filed this suit.

CreditData SW decided to make my life miserable, to not even relay my dispute to American Agencies as the FCRA requires.

Just looking at this stuff makes me so mad I could scream.

The audacity to refuse the dispute that the FDCPA specifically requires.

Since collectors often ignore disputes, as American Agencies did, the "this account is disputed" or "this collection is not legit" dispute is a vital part of preserving the consumers' legal right to have only validated collections destroying their credit and ruining their lives.

Additionally, it is unclear to me why CreditData SW didn't realize that this is the same account they just deleted in response to my "Bureau of Commercial" dispute on 8/8/01.

The scan of the CreditData SW refusal to investigate the fraudulent Pacific Bell collection dispute:

My 10/05/01 dispute with Experian

The Union Bank account that was just corrected in September to "closed by consumer" had the notation:

"Status: paid. $0 past due as of 8-2001"

Huh? I must be missing the part on the ADVS that says that is was past due.

Obviously, this is a derogatory notation, although I don't know how Fair Isaac rates it.

For a manual review the MIS report indicates that the account was past due at some time and that I then paid the delinquent balance. Of course that's not true.

I actually never used this account, it was an overdraft line and I don't usually write bad checks.

Note that I addressed the dispute to Experian, but they forwarded it to MIS.

The dispute:

MIS Exhibit 6: 8/27/01 ADVS Union Bank

The Union Bank ADVS shows that the "Hist. Status # mo" was changed from 18 to 0. I have no idea what that means.

Also, the "SCC: undef. Amt." was deleted as with Cap. One.

I had disputed that it was closed by me, not the credit grantor, and it was corrected.

Union Bank is a problem account with Trans Union, as they report it as "unrated" and I'm afraid to dispute it because it might get deleted. I also would not dispute a "closed by credit grantor" again -- this was 2001 and I didn't know how important account history is for FICO scores.

The ADVS:

MIS Exhibit 5: 8/23/01 ADVS Capital One

It is very strange that "somehow" the Capital One reporting was corrected prior to my submission of my 8/8/01 dispute. I also don't have the 7/23/01 report (Exh. 4) they claim to have sent to me. It doesn't contain any investigation results either.

It's also strange that CreditData SW sent the dispute to Capital One, while my dispute was clearly no longer applicable: I had disputed the delinquent balance, reported WITH the bk notation.

Talk about NO procedures at all to ensure the accuracy of credit reports.

And why did they totally change my dispute? They claim that I disputed "present/previous status/MOP rating/payment pattern."

Apparently "Dispute #1: 007" is a "standard" dispute added to all disputes, and my actual dispute is in the remarks.
So, that's all strange. Have to ask about that.

The ACDV:

Why did MIS/Experian ask who an account belongs to?

It's pretty obvious. They didn't want consumers disputing accounts as not theirs.

What gives Experian/MIS the right to ask this question?

Forgot to post my objection to the TU motion for security of costs

Just noticed tonight that I hadn't posted it yet:

2/23/04: My objection to the TU motion for security of costs

Trans Union truly is a vile outfit!

FNANB settles 2 post bk discharge inquiries for $2,000 + deletion

I just remembered to update this documentary because I was looking at Randy's Bank One ordeal. The $2,000 settlement.

Bank One still claims to have had a permissible purpose to run Randy's credit, but I sure can't figure out from their filings what it is.

Why don't they tell us what it is?

E-mail received in the last two hours

Here are some excerpts:

"I am about to go crazy and would love any advice you have for me.

I had a 1500 dollar fone bill for (deleted) which they quickly gave to (deleted) to collect. During June – December I paid them in three installments the total bill. I asked for and received a memo from them in late December saying the account was closed and that the matter was clear.

So, great, huh? Naahhh. One month later, I received a letter from them demanding $500. I called them, spent hours on the phone with them, until one of the representatives said he understood what happened, and was going to clear the account. So, great, huh? Naaah. Now I call them and suddenly my bill is $4000, they claim I have 4 accounts, etc. I am going out of my mind."

The next one:

"Hello :

I have a debt of 1,500+ with (deleted). Its a debt from '95
I had a letter of negotionation drawn up by my lawyer ( as a favor to me,
because she doent really handle credit cases) I have sent , and re sent
the letter to every address I could find on Providian...even to the
Credit commision..
yet I recieve absoulutely NO response.
I do not owe the amount they have totalled up...I only truly owe about
950...the rest is artributed to fees , late- finance- interest- whatever
they can tack on.
My inablitiy to pay was and still is due to finacial hardships, due to
severe health problems ( and the bills that goes with them ). I am on
disability but willing to try and pay a negotiated settlement on the
account.
Yet no one responds.I have been trying an entire year !
My lawyer gets no response, I get no response...what else can I do ???
I want to clean my credit report of this matter...but no one really waNTS
TO HELP. oTHER DEBT CONSULERS SAY THAT THEIR COMPANIES WON'T HELP ,
BECAUSE MY DEBT IS TO SMALL.
I am contacting Ms.Feathers in hopes of her advice as to what I should
do.....
I can't seem to get this cleared on my own, can she - will she help ?I
know that she also doesn't handle small debt negotiation...but any help,
a phone call to providian on my behalf , would open a door for me,
perhaps??
I will be grateful for anything !!!
Thank you !"

Well, there you got an idiot of a lawyer doing favors. Who would be so stupid and offer to pay a nine (9) year old debt???? In most states the SOL is long expired, and the first step is certainly a validation request to document the balance.

Next:

"Please let me know as soon as possible if you can help me or to bug off.

I live in the State of (deleted). I received a summons from (deleted) dated 1/20. I received the summons on 2/24 and of course it stated I only had 20 days from the date of filing to "Answer" the summons. I do not dispute the debt I owe to Chase but I do dispute how much they are trying to sue me for. My credit limit was 1,500.00 and they want 3,838.00. I tried to settle with them for 1900.00 on 2/25 but they would not accept. I then called back on 2/26 and stated that was able to come up with 2500.00 and they asked for more money (As Ms Jones stated, "you'll get the money, just watch God has a way of making things happen, it'll just fall in your lap" but to send the check. I was then to call back on 3/25/04 to make payment arrangements. Unfortunately the additional 600.00 fell through. I had a family emergency and had to leave town from 2/27 - 3/8. While I was outof town, I remembered that I had to send them a check so I called my roommate and asked him to mail it. I stated to the law firm on 2/26 that I lost my paperwork and the only way I was able to contact them was by hitting redial on my phone since they were the last number I dialed the previosu day from my office. Anyway, I already made a check payable for 1900.00 with "paid in full" in the memo line along with my SSN as well as wrote PIF on the endorsement line on the back of the check from the first time I thought I was going to be able to settle, I just never ripped it up. My roommate asked me where to send the payment and I stated I lost the paper work. He asked me what the debt was for and I told him Chase. He looked up the payment address online for Chase and that is where he sent it. To conclude, Chase cashed the payment on or around 3/6/04. The law offices of (deleted) contacted me today and I explained what happened. they said they will not consider it a payment and I should not have sent it there. ThPlease help if possible.ems ey will continue to enter a judgement against me. Anyway, I was told that as long as Chase cashed the check, they are obligated to accept it as settlement (this was from a friend of a friend, you know how that goes). The law firm asked me to call Chase and retrieve the funds back so I can forward to them. I do not know what to do next and feel like I am having a nervous breakdown. Please advise if you can help or maybe point me in the right direction. Any help is greatly appreciated.

Thank in Advance,"

I don't know what people are THINKING!!!

I'm not a lawyer and I'm BUSY!

What really gets me is that some people get upset when I send them http://www.bayhouse.com/donate.shtml and ask them to publish their problems. They don't even subscribe to CreditFactors, some seem to think it is my duty to dismiss my lawsuit and to cheerfully work for $1 or $2 an hour on their problems.

I don't think so!!!

It's not all people, but it sure can get irritating.

And frustrating, why can't people just search the web sites, do a little reading and find the answers themselves?

Why do so many people have ZERO "life" skills.

Most (not all) are totally unable to learn. I've worked literally hundreds of hours on specific cases, and my clients continue to have one problem after the other, they continue to make phone calls, don't put anything in writing, ...

It's like trying to teach lemmings not to commit suicide. It can't be done.

Quite depressing.

One person wrote back:

"You don't want clients? than what is your purpose in doing this?"

And that's even more depressing.

OUCH! RNB ran my Experian ...

On 2/27/04, I called Retailers National Bank on my Mervyns account. I noticed that they had reduced the limit from $400 to $200.

They told me that they reduced the limit because I haven't used the card and to "protect me". So I asked what it takes to increase my limit again, and she said she'd have to run the credit. Thinking they'd do an account review, I didn't care.

I just checked PG and it's a HARD inquiry. And, they only raised the limit to $300. Ack!

Amerix gets makeover

New names, same old fraud and deception.

I doubt they'll tell consumers that they can have a 726 FICO credit score only 2 years after filing for bankruptcy.

Yup, it's true, details are in my bankrupty affidavit.

If you qualify to discharge your debts, why would anyone in their right mind RUIN their credit for many many years with credit counseling?

Why would you LOWER your FICO scores and pay MORE for insurance and credit, pay deposits for cell phones and utilities if you don't have to?

CareOne Sets the New Standard of Excellence for Credit Counseling

March 10, 2004 — COLUMBIA, Md. — 3C Incorporated today announced enhanced standards for nonprofit credit counseling agencies to license use of the CareOne Credit Counseling(SM) mark. These new standards build on the tradition that CareOne-branded agencies have established of providing premier credit counseling services to American consumers.

"We are proud of the CareOne(SM) service mark and what it means to consumers. After evaluating the mark over the past 18 months, we are pleased to announce new standards that will enhance the quality of financial education and counseling received by the customers of credit counseling agencies that carry the CareOne(SM) service mark," said Bernie Dancel, CEO of Ascend One, the parent company of 3Ci. "It is important that consumers know that agencies offering CareOne(SM) Credit Counseling services will provide them with the very best in financial education and counseling to help them get their finances under control and better their personal finances in the future."

In September 2002, the CareOne Credit Counseling service mark established that each person who contacts a nonprofit credit counseling agency offering education and counseling under the CareOne(SM) service mark will be treated with honesty, understanding, respect, humility, humanity and caring.

The expanded CareOne standards mean that to license the CareOne(SM) service mark, credit counseling agencies must:
— Provide patient, personalized financial counseling and education to every client who seeks assistance, including an individualized assessment of the client's financial situation in order to identify and help implement the best alternative to address his or her needs;
— Devote at least 1,000 hours per year to community outreach activities
that address consumer credit and money management;
— Partner with an educational institution to advance educational
offerings and to promote general consumer financial awareness, education, and literacy;
— Serve all clients who seek assistance, regardless of ability to pay, creditors owed, amount owed, or enrollment in a debt management plan;
— Comply with the "best practices" standards of the Association of Independent Consumer Credit Counseling Agencies or the National Foundation for Credit Counseling.

With these strengthened standards, the CareOne(SM) service mark becomes an even stronger signal that CareOne(SM) agencies provide first-class educational, counseling, and debt management services to all consumers, tailored to each individual's financial needs.

About Ascend One Corp.

Ascend One Corporation is the parent company to a family of financial businesses that includes Amerix Corp., FreedomPoint Financial and 3Ci. Amerix Corp. provides back-office processing and technology for credit counseling agencies and is the largest third party service provider for the credit counseling industry. FreedomPoint Financial provides consumers with multiple solutions to complex money problems. 3C Incorporated owns the CareOne Credit Counseling service mark. CareOne Credit Counseling is the premier level of service in the credit counseling industry. Ascend One is based in Columbia, MD.

Source: Company Press Release

NCO moving call centers overseas

Collecting debt going overseas

"...

Because debt collection is extremely labor intensive, it's an industry that, like customer service, all but demands to be farmed out to the cheapest possible workforce.

The largest debt collector in the United States is a Pennsylvania company called NCO Group, which last month reported quarterly profit of $10.3 million, up from $6.8 million a year earlier.

NCO is in the final stages of acquiring RMH Teleservices, a major operator of call centers. The company thus expects to combine its already extensive debt-collection services with a small army of call-center workers in Canada, India, Barbados and the Philippines.

Paul Weitzel, NCO's executive vice president of corporate development, said overseas facilities account for about 5 percent of his company's debt- collection activities. Within five years, he said, at least a quarter of all of NCO's debt collection will be conducted from abroad.

Weitzel said this is because NCO's 50,000 clients -- he declined to name even one -- are demanding greater savings through lower costs, and because NCO can't find a sufficient number of U.S. workers "who will take the job for what we're willing to pay."

"As long as clients want to cut costs and we can't fill seats in the United States, you're going to see this trend continuing," he said.

This means that a growing number of overseas workers will have access to the names, addresses, Social Security numbers and, in some cases, complete credit histories of U.S. consumers. Weitzel, however, was quick to note that data can be compromised anywhere.

..."

Prisoners don't make good debt collectors while in prison since they don't get paid on commission. But I guess they can apply once they are released.

Telemarketing from prison: Inmates are paid between 12 cents and $5.69 an hour

Now, US Firms Outsource to Prisons!

"A report in The Guardian said that the prison inmates are model employees for the US call centre industry: they speak courteously on the phone, are never late or absent, and gladly work as low as $130 a month. Also, in an industry which is plagued by high employee turnover, the prisoners are like a boon as they work for at least three years.

Perry Johnson, a Southfield, Mich.-based consulting company, is one such company which chose to remain in the United States rather than join a host of telemarketing companies moving offshore.

Earlier, Perry Johnson had planned to move to India, says The Guardian. But the company chose instead to open a call centre inside the Snake River Correctional Institution, a sprawling razor wire and cinder block state penitentiary a few miles west of the Idaho line.

"The center's opening followed a yearlong effort by the Oregon Department of Corrections to recruit businesses that would otherwise move offshore, and echoes a national trend among state and federal prisons to recruit such companies," said the newspaper.

"This is a niche where the prison industry could really help the US economy," The Guardian quoted Robert Killgore as saying. Killgore is director of Inside Oregon Enterprises, the quasi-state agency that recruits for-profit business to prisons.

"I'm really excited about this. We keep the benefits here in the United States with companies where it's fruitless to compete on the outside," said Killgore, reported The Guardian.

Prison authorities have praised work programmes aimed at enhancing inmates' skills and self-respect and keeping them from falling back into criminal activity.

But some workers union have criticised the move as taking jobs away from the private sector. Critics say the idea of retaining American jobs in prisons is a violation of minimum wage laws and an affront to free workers.

Killgore, however, says that such protests are debatable as the jobs would have moved out of the country anyway.

The national prison labor trade groups support the idea. Ten states including Oregon employ inmates in for-profit call centers. Oregon and many others also make garments and furniture — industries that have largely moved offshore, other than in prisons. Inmates are paid between 12 cents and $5.69 an hour, according to Bureau of Prisons statistics, said The Guardian.

Long-term inmates, meanwhile, are quite happy doing the job and "not wearing a ball and chain."

Perry Johnson managed to open its call centre in the Oregon prison for half the price of relocating to India, and achieved many of the same benefits, according to Mike Reagan, director of Inside Oregon Enterprises at Snake River, said The Guardian.

At Snake River, to qualify for the call centre job, inmates must have three to five years remaining on their sentence. Outside, the typical turnover is nine months. Randomly screened Also, inmates make good telemarketers, The Guardian report said, quoting prison officials.

The prisoners work 40-hour weeks in rows of nondescript cubicles.

..."

So they learn in prison how to sell crap nobody needs, how to disturb and offend people with their idiotic calls. Nobody should get paid for that.

The prisoners get skilled at misleading and manipulating people!

I don't get why they don't have to pay at least minimum wage. A lot of prisoners owe their victims and the earnings should be applied towards restitution and of course towards the food/housing in prison.

This is really insane!

Humor: paying cash with a $1,000,000 bill

"MARCH 9--Meet Alice Regina Pike. The 35-year-old Georgia woman must think Wal-Mart cashiers are rather dumb, because she actually just tried to pass a $1 million bill at one of the retail chain's megastores."

It's actually not that funny, rather sad. After the initial laugh I'm wondering how many people think like her. If she had any brains, she would have said it was a joke. I hope she doesn't get jail time but some help instead.

Don't buy TurboTax!

I just wasted THREE hours with Intuit support. I'm trying to finally do my 2002 taxes.

After lots of runaround by the online chat support, they gave me a code to get phone support. Without that code it's $20 per call for technical support.

Of course they didn't solve the problem.

The problem:

When I went to install the CD I got this error:

"This Intuit Product is no longer available
Please call 1-800-333-2917 and we will assist you over the phone"

I called the number and was unable to get any assistance, it was automated hell.

I went to their site and did the "chat" support. The first guy told me to copy it to the drive and install from there.

Did that. Same error.

The 2nd guy finally gave me the code for the free tech support call.

Was told to reset the computer date by a year, and that got me to an Internet Library Error:

Security certificate date expired."

I asked the guy why they would do something like that and he made some snide remarks about most people doing their 2002 taxes in 2003. Very much the attitude of the IRS.

I asked for his supervisor, and got to speak to Dave Rich - Intuit Performance Coach.

He had this same attitude! The bottom line:

Because I purchased the product on Ebay, he won't send me a working CD. The software was a marketing gimmick called myturbotax.com and it was designed to work only in 2003.

He didn't think there was anything wrong with the fact that this is nowhere disclosed on the box.

He implied that the product I purchased was a bootleg. I asked whether he would like me to send him the scans of the box, but he didn't care.

They don't care when people pirate their products?

He told me I was welcome to assemble the documentation for them. Hah!

He didn't even want to research whether the product had been registered by someone else. I'm very sure that this is not a bootleg, it came in the box with the Product Key and all the rebates and quickstart. I read through it, there's no mention that the software expires.

Well, I'm very glad that I told my neighbors last year not to buy TurboTax due to the printing issue, which I was aware of. It was the first time they prepared their taxes on the computer and they own real estate and had a real property sale in 2002. They got TaxCut and were happy with it.

What was I thinking when I bought TurboTax again? Having used it since the 80's, I was just so used to it.

I certainly will NEVER buy TurboTax again.

I still don't know WHY they would make tax preparation software expire, it's way up on the list of STUPID things to do.

The only way to top this is to not send me a functioning CD.

Not disclosing the limited functionality on the box is just downright illegal. I never had this type of problem with any other software. Even if it was disclosed inside, which it's not, it would still have to be on the box because NOBODY accepts returns for opened software!

Why YOU should not buy TurboTax:

You get a virus or for some reason have to format your drive, you get a new hard drive or a new computer, you diligently saved your data files, you need to print a copy of your return, look something up or amend the return, and you will NOT be able to install the software you PURCHASED!

To the morons at Intuit:

I'll never buy Quicken or TurboTax again, from now on it's bootlegs.

c: e-mailed to public_relations@intuit.com

CSC Service of Process Manager called

According to Rick Selwood, Service of Process Manager, CSC did NOT advise Equifax that they lost the previous mailing!

Good thing the U.S. Postal Service got the signature for the delivery of the first mailing from the CSC employee S. McKnight. And, I'm glad I just sent a copy of the original August mailing, so Equifax really can't claim that they didn't know that I previously mailed the package. And I recorded my VM to the Equifax legal department, explaining the situation in great detail. Equifax never called back, but that just documents what a scummy outfit they are.

Well, I certainly would NOT employ CSC.

Experian lies to minimize disputes

"Experian cannot delete or change information that is accurate or that has been verified as accurate."

That's the big lie. The FCRA specifically REQUIRES CRAs to review and consider consumer documentation:

§ 611. Procedure in case of disputed accuracy [15 U.S.C. § 1681i]

(a) Reinvestigations of disputed information.

(4) Consideration of consumer information. In conducting any reinvestigation under paragraph (1) with respect to disputed information in the file of any consumer, the consumer reporting agency shall review and consider all relevant information submitted by the consumer in the period described in paragraph (1)(A) with respect to such disputed information.

I'm sure this outrageous lie saves Experian many millions of dollars.

Martha Stewart - why is she the only one who is supposed to tell the truth?

I really can't figure this out.

She was NOT convicted of insider trading and the securities fraud charges were dropped.

Stewart's Defense Team Gambled - and Lost

"Instead, jurors convicted Stewart on all four counts - conspiracy, obstruction of justice and two counts of lying to investigators."

I don't get it. She didn't do anything wrong. Who got hurt?

She sold her stock when she got a tip, what's wrong with that? I guess nothing.

Why is it perfectly ok for Pacific Bell to submit false declarations? Why does Judge Broomfield not care?

Why can bankers and lawyers and corporate managers and execs lie under penalty of perjury and it's OK?????

Pacific Bell's Zulkifli Iljas perjury

I already pointed out in my objection to the Pacific Bell motion to dismiss that Iljas completely misrepresented the facts about this phone bill and why it went to collections.

But I hadn't realized that his omitting facts is just as important.

Mr. Zulkifli Iljas declared in his affidavit:

“On or about January 12, 1998 the account was assigned for collection to Bay Area Credit Service, a California corporation. Thereafter, on or about February 13, 2003, Ms. Baker’s unpaid bill was packaged with other unpaid customer bills and sold to American Agencies, a California corporation.”

Mr. Iljas should have mentioned the assignments to Professional Recovery (settled for documentation and statutory FDCPA damages) and the subsequent assignment to defendant American Agencies. Mr. Iljas did not mention these assignments to collection agencies for collection at all in his declaration.

Is it perjury because he failed to mention the assignments?

What are the standards?

I'm escpecially offended because Judge Broomfield wrote:

"In her motion for reconsideration, Baker argues that Pacific offered no evidence to substantiate how American could not have been Pacific's agent. Motion (doc. 130) at 2. This claim is not only untrue (since Pacific rebutted the agency relationship theory with the declaration of Zulkifli Iljas (doc. 120) at 7), a declaration which is admissible evidence), it misses the point. ... "

I can't find the rebuttal!!!! I'm considering ordering the filed declaration just to find out whether we're all looking at the same declaration.

Why is it that Iljas' declaration is worth more than mine and my many documents proving that American Agencies collected for Pacific Bell are worth nothing?

Do I have any legal recourse in Arizona against Mr. Iljas? He submitted the false affidavit in Phoenix federal court. I'm really tired of this crap, the ongoing lies and deception.

The Pacific Bell filings are scanned or posted in Word format.

MIS (CreditData SW) failure to disclose PP for inquiries

Back in 2001 I settled *one* WF inquiry on Equifax for $1,000.

Because CreditData SW didn't disclose the permissible purpose, I thought the Wells Fargo inquiries on Experien were promos. Now I'm sure that they were account reviews. (A/R) I had no open account with Wells Fargo and I didn't owe them, so they had no right to run my credit.

Wells Fargo reported a discharged account with a balance, and that's probably why they kept running my credit.

Of course I settled ALL claims when I signed the settlement agreement with Wells Fargo. It looks like the CreditData SW failure do disclose the PP caused some serious damages.

And that's one reason why it's so important that these soft inquiries are disclosed to consumers. I recently asked for the inquiries and PP in the last 2 years for the CIC tri-merged reports:

Exhibit AN-2: 2/28/04 letter to CIC attorney Courtney Vaudreuil

The Wells Fargo inquiries were in 2001, maybe they don't even have the records anymore.

I'm requesting an extension to respond to their motion for summary judgment, there were and still are so many problems with CreditData SW and Experian.

The complete docket to date

I thought maybe I missed the American Agencies Corporate Disclosure Statement, but I'm not finding it.

I sued American Credit Agencies, the suspended corporation. But recently, a reader found out that they also operate as ACA - what's going on?

Here's the entire docket:

Docket as of March 2, 2004 11:32 pm Web PACER (v2.4)

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

U.S. District Court

U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona (Prescott)

CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 03-CV-525

Baker v. Fair Isaac & Company, et al

Filed: 03/19/03
Assigned to: Judge Robert C Broomfield
Jury demand: Defendant
Demand: $0,000
Nature of Suit: 890
Lead Docket: None
Jurisdiction: Federal Question
Dkt# in other court: None
Cause: 15:1692 Fair Debt Collection Act

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

CHRISTINE BAKER Christine Baker
pla FAX (571)222-1000
[COR LD NTC pse] [PRO SE]
-
(deleted)
(206)202-4653

========================

FAIR, ISAAC AND COMPANY, INC. Robert J Bruno, Esq
dft [term 01/28/04]
[term 01/28/04] FAX (602)230-5006
[COR LD NTC -]
Michele Lee Forney
[term 01/28/04]
FAX (602)230-5035
[COR LD NTC -]
Sanders & Parks PC
3030 N 3rd St
Ste 1300
Phoenix, AZ 85012-3099
(602)532-5600

========================

THOMAS G GRUDNOWSKI Robert J Bruno, Esq
dft [term 01/28/04]
[term 01/28/04] FAX (602)230-5006
[COR LD NTC -]
Michele Lee Forney
[term 01/28/04]
FAX (602)230-5035
[COR LD NTC -]
Sanders & Parks PC

3030 N 3rd St
Ste 1300
Phoenix, AZ 85012-3099
(602)532-5600

========================

BARRY PAPERNO Robert J Bruno, Esq
dft [term 01/28/04]
[term 01/28/04] FAX (602)230-5006
[COR LD NTC -]
Michele Lee Forney
[term 01/28/04]
FAX (602)230-5035
[COR LD NTC -]
Sanders & Parks PC
3030 N 3rd St
Ste 1300
Phoenix, AZ 85012-3099
(602)532-5600

========================

THOMAS J QUINN Robert J Bruno, Esq
dft [term 01/28/04]
[term 01/28/04] FAX (602)230-5006
[COR LD NTC -]
Michele Lee Forney
[term 01/28/04]
FAX (602)230-5035
[COR LD NTC -]
Sanders & Parks PC
3030 N 3rd St
Ste 1300
Phoenix, AZ 85012-3099
(602)532-5600

========================

EQUIFAX CREDIT INFORMATION Lewis P Perling
SERVICES FAX (404)815-6555
dft [COR LD NTC -]
Kilpatrick Stockton LLP
1100 Peachtree St
Ste 2800
Atlanta, GA 30309-4530
(404)815-6500

Steven Gerald Ford
FTS 212-8525
FAX (602)240-6925
[COR LD NTC -]
Stinson Morrison Hecker LLP
1850 N Central Ave
Ste 2100
Phoenix, AZ 85004-4584
(602)279-1600

========================

TOM CHAPMAN Steven Gerald Ford
dft FTS 212-8525
FAX (602)240-6925
[COR LD NTC -]
Stinson Morrison Hecker LLP
1850 N Central Ave
Ste 2100
Phoenix, AZ 85004-4584
(602)279-1600

========================

TRANS UNION LLC Lori Anne Higuera
dft FTS 916-5387
FAX (602)916-5587
[COR LD NTC -]
Sherida Colvin
FAX (602)916-5617
[COR LD NTC -]
Fennemore Craig PC
3003 N Central Ave
Ste 2600
Phoenix, AZ 85012-2913
(602)916-5000

Amanda S Lewis
FAX (214)651-4330
[COR LD NTC -]
Strasburger & Price LLP
901 Main St
Ste 4300
Dallas, TX 75202-3794
(214)651-4300

========================

HARRY GAMBILL Lori Anne Higuera
dft FTS 916-5387
FAX (602)916-5587
[COR LD NTC -]
Sherida Colvin
FAX (602)916-5617
[COR LD NTC -]
Fennemore Craig PC
3003 N Central Ave
Ste 2600
Phoenix, AZ 85012-2913
(602)916-5000

Amanda S Lewis
FAX (214)651-4330
[COR LD NTC -]
Strasburger & Price LLP
901 Main St
Ste 4300
Dallas, TX 75202-3794
(214)651-4300

========================

EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, Timothy Joel Eckstein
INC. FAX (602)664-2069
dft [COR LD NTC -]
Osborn Maledon PA
2929 N Central Ave
Ste 2100
Phoenix, AZ 85012-2794
(602)640-9000

Richard J Grabowski
FAX (949)553-7539
[COR LD NTC -]
Jones Day
3 Park Plaza
11th Floor
Irvine, CA 92614
(949)851-3939

Courtney E Vaudreuil
FAX (415)875-5700
[COR LD NTC -]
Jones Day
555 California St
26th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
(415)626-3939

========================

CRAIG SMITH Timothy Joel Eckstein
dft [term 01/28/04]
[term 01/28/04] FAX (602)664-2069
[COR LD NTC -]
Osborn Maledon PA
2929 N Central Ave
Ste 2100
Phoenix, AZ 85012-2794
(602)640-9000

Richard J Grabowski
[term 01/28/04]
FAX (949)553-7539
[COR LD NTC -]
Jones Day
3 Park Plaza
11th Floor
Irvine, CA 92614
(949)851-3939

Courtney E Vaudreuil
[term 01/28/04]
FAX (415)875-5700
[COR LD NTC -]
Jones Day
555 California St
26th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
(415)626-3939

========================

CREDIT DATA SOUTHWEST, INC. Christopher Anthony Coury
dft [COR LD NTC -]
John Michael Fry
[COR LD NTC -]
Ryley Carlock & Applewhite PA
1 N Central Ave
Ste 1200
Phoenix, AZ 85004-4417
(602)258-7701

========================

CONSUMERINFO.COM Timothy Joel Eckstein
dft FAX (602)664-2069
[COR LD NTC -]

Osborn Maledon PA
2929 N Central Ave
Ste 2100
Phoenix, AZ 85012-2794
(602)640-9000

Richard J Grabowski
FAX (949)553-7539
[COR LD NTC -]
Jones Day
3 Park Plaza
11th Floor
Irvine, CA 92614
(949)851-3939

Courtney E Vaudreuil
FAX (415)875-5700
[COR LD NTC -]
Jones Day
555 California St
26th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
(415)626-3939

========================

COMPASS BANK Stephen Jeffrey Anthony
dft FAX (480)425-4914
[COR LD NTC -]
Sacks Tierney PA
4250 N Drinkwater Blvd
4th Floor
Scottsdale, AZ 85251-3647
(480)425-2600

========================

CAPITAL ONE Joseph Merrill Udall
dft FAX (480)898-3660
[COR LD NTC -]
Law Firm of Joseph M Udall PLC
18 E University Dr
Ste 201
Mesa, AZ 85201
(480)222-0398

========================

HOUSEHOLD Lisa Marie Coulter, Esq
dft [term 11/17/03]
[term 11/17/03] FAX (602)382-6070
[COR LD NTC -]
Carrie Marie Francis
[term 11/17/03]
FTS 382-6283
FAX (602)382-6070
[COR LD NTC -]
Snell & Wilmer LLP
1 Arizona Ctr
400 E Van Buren
Phoenix, AZ 85004-0001
(602)382-6000

========================

PROVIDIAN
dft
[term 01/28/04]

========================

AMERICAN CREDIT AGENCIES INC Stephen H Turner
dft [COR LD NTC -]
Carlson Messer & Turner LLP
5959 W Century Blvd
Ste 1214
Los Angeles, CA 90045
(310)242-2200

Mark D Fullerton, Esq
FAX (480)838-9302
[COR LD NTC -]
Martin Hart & Fullerton
1839 S Alma School Rd
Ste 354
Mesa, AZ 85210-3028
(480)838-9000

========================

TOM WELLS Stephen H Turner
dft [COR LD NTC -]
Carlson Messer & Turner LLP
5959 W Century Blvd
Ste 1214
Los Angeles, CA 90045

(310)242-2200

Mark D Fullerton, Esq
FAX (480)838-9302
[COR LD NTC -]
Martin Hart & Fullerton
1839 S Alma School Rd
Ste 354
Mesa, AZ 85210-3028
(480)838-9000

========================

PROFESSIONAL RECOVERY SYSTEMS
dft
[term 08/06/03]

========================

PACIFIC BELL Steven D Rathfon
dft [term 01/28/04]
[term 01/28/04] FAX (510)530-9422
[COR LD NTC -]
Law Offices of Steven D Rathfon
6114 LaSalle Ave
#518
Oakland, CA 94611
(510)530-6668

========================

VERIZON WIRELESS Jared G Parker, Esq
dft FTS 212-8520
FAX (602)240-6925
[COR LD NTC -]
Rodrick Joseph Coffey
FAX (602)240-6925
[COR LD NTC -]
Stinson Morrison Hecker LLP
1850 N Central Ave
Ste 2100
Phoenix, AZ 85004-4584
(602)279-1600

========================

T-MOBILE Douglas F Behm
dft FTS 262-5861
FAX (602)253-3213
[COR LD NTC -]
Michael J Farrell
[COR LD NTC -]
Jennings Strouss & Salmon PLC
Collier Ctr
201 E Washington
Ste 1100
Phoenix, AZ 85004-2385
(602)262-5900

========================

ROBERT GRAY
aka
Bobby Grantham
dft

========================

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION Suzanne M Chynoweth
dft FAX (602)514-7760
[COR LD NTC -]
US Attorney's Office
2 Renaissance Sq
40 N Central
Ste 1200
Phoenix, AZ 85004-4408
(602)514-7500

========================

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS Suzanne M Chynoweth
COMMISSION FAX (602)514-7760
dft [COR LD NTC -]
US Attorney's Office
2 Renaissance Sq
40 N Central
Ste 1200
Phoenix, AZ 85004-4408
(602)514-7500

========================

FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF Thomas A Maraz, Esq
RICHMOND [term 03/02/04]
dft FTS 530-8411
[term 03/02/04] FAX (602)530-8500
[COR LD NTC -]
Maureen Ann Welsh
[term 03/02/04]
[COR LD NTC -]
Gallagher & Kennedy PA
2575 E Camelback Rd
Ste 1100
Phoenix, AZ 85016-9225
(602)530-8000

Suzanne M Chynoweth
[term 03/02/04]
FAX (602)514-7760
[COR LD NTC -]
US Attorney's Office
2 Renaissance Sq
40 N Central
Ste 1200
Phoenix, AZ 85004-4408
(602)514-7500

========================

JAMES MCAFEE Thomas A Maraz, Esq
dft [term 03/02/04]
[term 03/02/04] FTS 530-8411
FAX (602)530-8500
[COR LD NTC -]
Maureen Ann Welsh
[term 03/02/04]
[COR LD NTC -]
Gallagher & Kennedy PA
2575 E Camelback Rd
Ste 1100
Phoenix, AZ 85016-9225
(602)530-8000

========================

JOHN DOES, 1-20
dft

========================

NELNET LOAN SERVICES INC. E Scott Dosek, Esq
aka FTS 429-7112
Nelnet Corporation FAX (480)429-5001
dft [COR LD NTC -]
David Matthew Park
[COR LD NTC -]
Kutak Rock LLP
8601 N Scottsdale Rd
Ste 300
Scottsdale, AZ 85253-2742
(480)429-5000

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

DOCKET PROCEEDINGS

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

DATE # DOCKET ENTRY

3/19/03 1 COMPLAINT FILED (elh) [Entry date 03/19/03]

5/22/03 2 MOTION for admission pro hac vice as to Richard J
Grabowski, atty for dft Experian Info Solutn [2-1] (sat)
[Entry date 05/23/03]

5/22/03 3 MOTION for admission pro hac vice as to Courtney Elena
Vaudreuil, atty for dft Experian Info Solutn [3-1] (sat)
[Entry date 05/23/03]

6/5/03 4 Notice of ERRATA by dft Experian Info Solutn, dft Craig
Smith, dft ConsumerInfo.com to Motion for admission pro
hac vice as to Richard J Grabowski, atty for dft Experian
Info Solutn [2-1] AND Motion for admission pro hac vice as
to Courtney Elena Vaudreuil, atty for dft Experian Info
Solutn [3-1] (represent additional parties Craig Smith and
Consumerinfo.com) (sat) [Entry date 06/05/03]

6/16/03 5 ORDER by Judge Frederick J. Martone granting motion for
admission pro hac vice as to Richard J Grabowski, atty for
dft Experian Info Solutn [2-1] (cc: all counsel) (ld)
[Entry date 06/16/03]

6/16/03 6 ORDER by Judge Frederick J. Martone granting motion for
admission pro hac vice as to Courtney Elena Vaudreuil, atty
for dft Experian Info Solutn [3-1] (cc: all counsel) (ld)
[Entry date 06/16/03]

6/20/03 7 STIPULATION to extend time to answer complaint [1-1] (to
7/24/03) by pla Christine Baker, dft ConsumerInfo.com [7-1]
(proposed answer not provided) (ld) [Entry date 06/23/03]

6/23/03 8 ORDER by Judge Frederick J. Martone granting stipulation
to extend time to answer complaint [1-1] (to 7/24/03) by
pla Christine Baker, dft ConsumerInfo.com [7-1] (proposed
answer not provided) (cc: all counsel) (ld)
[Entry date 06/23/03]

6/23/03 9 STIPULATION to Extend the Deadline until 7/22/03 for
Verizon Wireless to File an answer/ Responsive Pleading to
Plaintiff's Complaint [1-1] by pla Christine Baker, dft
Verizon Wireless [9-1] (first request) (sat)
[Entry date 06/24/03]

6/24/03 10 ANSWER to Complaint [1-1] by dft T-Mobile (sat)
[Entry date 06/25/03]

6/24/03 11 Rule 7.1 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by dft T-Mobile (sat)
[Entry date 06/25/03]

6/24/03 12 MOTION to Dismiss as to dft Household by dft Household
[12-1], or in the alternative to Compel Arbitration by
dft Household [12-2] (sat) [Entry date 06/25/03]

6/26/03 13 Notice of ERRATA by dft Household to Motion to Dismiss as
to dft Household by dft Household [12-1], or in the
alternative, Motion to Compel Arbitration by dft Household
[12-2] to provide the Court with the original signature on
Stephanie Jimenez's Affidavit (Exhibit 1 to the Motion) and
legible and correct copies of Cardmember Agreements
(Exhibit A to the Affidavit) (sat) [Entry date 06/30/03]

6/30/03 14 NOTICE of Filing Signature Page to the Stipulation for
Extension of Time to Respond filed 6/20/03 by dft
ConsumerInfo.com (sat) [Entry date 07/02/03]

7/14/03 15 STIPULATION for Dismissal With Prejudice to dismiss dft
Professional Recovery Systems Inc from this action by pla
Christine Baker, dft Professional Recover (sat)
[Entry date 07/17/03]

7/16/03 16 ANSWER to complaint [1-1] by dft Nelnet Corporation (sat)
[Entry date 07/18/03]

7/16/03 17 Rule 7.1 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by dft Nelnet Loan Svc Inc
(sat) [Entry date 07/18/03]

7/17/03 18 MOTION for ruling (Summary Disposition) on Household
Bank's Motion to Dismiss or in the Alternative Motion to
Compel Arbitration by dft Household [18-1] (sat)
[Entry date 07/18/03]

7/21/03 19 ORDER by Judge Frederick J. Martone hereby recuses himself
FURTHER ORDERED Case reassigned by random draw to Judge
Robert C. Broomfield (with notice sent) (cc: all
counsel/FJM/RCB) (map) [Entry date 07/21/03]

7/22/03 20 ANSWER to complaint [1-1] by dft Verizon Wireless (sat)
[Entry date 07/23/03]

7/23/03 21 Rule 7.1 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by dft Verizon Wireless (sat)
[Entry date 07/24/03]

7/24/03 22 RESPONSE (Objection) by pla to Motion to Dismiss as to dft
Household by dft Household [12-1], or in the alternative,
Motion to Compel Arbitration by dft Household [12-2] (sat)
[Entry date 07/24/03]

7/24/03 23 Notice of Motion and MOTION to Dismiss Complaint of
Plaintiff Christine Baker as to dft ConsumerInfo.com by dft
ConsumerInfo.com [23-1] (sat) [Entry date 07/29/03]

7/24/03 23 MEMORANDUM of Points and Authorities IN SUPPORT by dft
ConsumerInfo.com of Motion to Dismiss Complaint of
Plaintiff Christine Baker as to dft ConsumerInfo.com by dft
ConsumerInfo.com [23-1] (sat) [Entry date 07/29/03]

7/24/03 23 NOTICE OF HEARING by dft ConsumerInfo.com setting Motion to
Dismiss Complaint of Plaintiff Christine Baker as to dft
ConsumerInfo.com by dft ConsumerInfo.com [23-1] at 11:00
10/20/03 (sat) [Entry date 07/29/03]

7/31/03 24 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by dft Experian Info Solutn
(ld) [Entry date 08/01/03]

7/31/03 25 NOTICE by dft Experian Info Solutn of service of corporate
disclosure statement (ld) [Entry date 08/01/03]

8/1/03 26 REPLY by dft Household to response in Support of Motion to
Dismiss as to dft Household by dft Household [12-1], or in
the Alternative, Motion to Compel Arbitration by dft
Household [12-2] (sat) [Entry date 08/05/03]

8/5/03 27 ANSWER to complaint [1-1] by dft Credit Data Southwes (sat)
[Entry date 08/06/03]

8/6/03 28 ORDER by Judge Robert C. Broomfield pursuant to
Stipulation [15-1] of the parites, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED
that Defendant Professional Recovery Systems Inc be
dismissed from this action with prejudice, each party to
bear its own attorney's fees and costs ; party Professional
Recover dismissed (cc: all counsel) (sat)
[Entry date 08/06/03]

8/8/03 29 SEPARATE ANSWER to Complaint [1-1] by dft American Credit
Agcy, dft Tom Wells; jury demand (sat) [Entry date 08/08/03]

8/12/03 30 Notice of Motion and MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff Christine
Baker's Complaint as to dft Craig Smith by dft Craig Smith
[30-1] (sat) [Entry date 08/14/03]

8/12/03 30 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT THEREOF by
dft Craig Smith of Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff Christine
Baker's Complaint as to dft Craig Smith by dft Craig Smith
[30-1] (sat) [Entry date 08/14/03]

8/12/03 31 ANSWER to complaint [1-1] by dft Experian Info Solutn (sat)
[Entry date 08/14/03]

8/12/03 32 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by dft Household (sat)
[Entry date 08/14/03]

8/13/03 33 CROSS-MOTION to Order Consumerinfo.com to Cease SElling
Incomplete and Incorrect Consumer Disclosures and
Misleading and Fraudulent Credit Scores by pla [33-1] and
RESPONSE (Objection) to Motion to Dismiss Complaint of
Plaintiff Christine Baker as to dft ConsumerInfo.com by dft
ConsumerInfo.com [23-1] by pla (sat) [Entry date 08/14/03]

8/13/03 33 RESPONSE by pla to Memorandum in support [23-1] by dft
Consumerinfo.com (sat) [Entry date 08/14/03]

8/20/03 -- Pro Hac Vice $25 Fee Paid as to Richard J Grabowski (bas)
[Entry date 08/20/03]

8/20/03 34 REPLY by dft ConsumerInfo.com to response in Support of
its Motion to Dismiss Complaint of Plaintiff Christine
Baker as to dft ConsumerInfo.com by dft ConsumerInfo.com
[23-1] (sat) [Entry date 08/21/03]

8/25/03 -- Pro Hac Vice $25 Fee Paid as to Courtney E Vaudreuil (bas)
[Entry date 08/25/03]

8/29/03 35 RESPONSE (Objection) by pla to Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff
Christine Baker's Complaint as to dft Craig Smith by dft
Craig Smith [30-1] (sat) [Entry date 09/03/03]

9/8/03 36 REPLY by dft Craig Smith to response in Support of his
Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff Christine Baker's Complaint as
to dft Craig Smith by dft Craig Smith [30-1] (sat)
[Entry date 09/09/03]

9/22/03 37 ORDER by Judge Robert C. Broomfield granting motion for
ruling (Summary Disposition) on Household Bank's Motion to
Dismiss or in the Alternative Motion to Compel Arbitration
by dft Household [18-1]; denying as moot the motion to
Dismiss as to dft Household by dft Household [12-1],
denying as moot the motion to Compel Arbitration by dft
Household [12-2] (cc: all counsel) (ld)
[Entry date 09/22/03]

9/25/03 38 MOTION to Dismiss as to dft Compass Bank by dft Compass
Bank [38-1] (sat) [Entry date 09/25/03]

10/1/03 39 MINUTE ORDER: The plaintiff having requested in her
objections to the motions to dismiss that oral argument
scheduled for October 20, 2003 be vacated and counsel for
defendants having orally advised the Court that she waives
oral argument, the Motion Hearing re: Motion to Dismiss
Complaint of Plaintiff Christine Baker as to dft
ConsumerInfo.com by dft ConsumerInfo.com [23-1] set on
October 20, 2003 is VACATED and the motions will be deemed
submitted. (cc: RCB, all counsel) [39-1] (kbet)
[Entry date 10/01/03]

10/7/03 40 MOTION for admission pro hac vice as to Steven D Rathfon,
atty for dft Pacific Bell [40-1] (sat) [Entry date 10/07/03]
[Edit date 10/07/03]

10/8/03 41 MINUTE ORDER: Counsel having notified the Court that
plaintiff waives oral argument on the Motion to Dismiss
filed by defendant Craig Smith, and the Court having
reviewed plaintiff's objections requesting oral argument
set on October 20, 2003 be vacated, the Court Orders
VACATING the oral argument set on defendant Craig Smith's
Motion to Dismiss [30-1] set on October 20, 2003, which was
the same date and time previously set for
ConsumerInfo.com's oral argument. (cc: all counsel) [41-1]
re: order (minute) [41-1] (kbet) [Entry date 10/08/03]

10/8/03 -- Pro Hac Vice $25 Fee Paid as to Steven D Rathfon (bas)
[Entry date 10/08/03]

10/9/03 42 NOTICE of Motion to Dismiss Complaint for Lack of Personal
Jurisdiction by dft Pacific Bell (sat) [Entry date 10/09/03]

10/9/03 43 MOTION to Dismiss Complaint for Lack of Personal
Jurisdiction by dft Pacific Bell [43-1] (sat)
[Entry date 10/09/03]

10/9/03 43 MEMORANDUM of Points and Authorities by dft Pacific Bell re
Motion to Dismiss Complaint for Lack of Personal
Jurisdiction by dft Pacific Bell [43-1] (sat)
[Entry date 10/09/03]

10/9/03 43 DECLARATION of Susan A Johnson in Support of Motion to
Dismiss Complaint for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction by dft
Pacific Bell [43-1] by dft Pacific Bell (sat)
[Entry date 10/09/03]

10/9/03 43 DECLARATION of Julie Wiedner in Support of Motion to
Dismiss Complaint for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction by dft
Pacific Bell [43-1] by dft Pacific Bell (sat)
[Entry date 10/09/03]

10/9/03 43 DECLARATION of Zulkifli Iljas in Support of Motion to
Dismiss Complaint for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction by dft
Pacific Bell [43-1] by dft Pacific Bell (sat)
[Entry date 10/09/03]

10/9/03 44 PROOF OF SERVICE of Pacific Bell Telephone Company's Notice
of Motion, Motion to Dismiss Complaint for Lack of
Jurisdiction, Memorandum of Points and Authorities,
Declarations of Susan A Johnson, Julie Wiedner and Zulkifli
Iljas in Support and Proposed Order to pla, Christine
Baker, pro per by dft Pacific Bell (sat)
[Entry date 10/09/03]

10/14/03 45 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by dft ConsumerInfo.com (ld)
[Entry date 10/15/03]

10/15/03 46 RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED summons/complaint upon dft Tom
Wells by service upon Cori Lynn, General Manager, in
Torrance, CA on 7/1/03 (ld) [Entry date 10/16/03]

10/15/03 47 RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED summons/complaint upon dft FTC,
dft FCC, dft Federal Reserve Bk R by certified mail service
upon John Ashcroft, US Attorney General, in Washington, DC
on 9/22/03 (ld) [Entry date 10/16/03]

10/15/03 48 RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED summons/complaint upon dft FTC,
dft FCC, dft Federal Reserve Bk R by certified mail service
upon the US Attorney, District of AZ, in Phoenix, AZ on
9/22/03 (ld) [Entry date 10/16/03]

10/15/03 49 WAIVER of Service of summons and complaint upon dft
T-Mobile waiver sent on 4/25/03 (ld) [Entry date 10/16/03]

10/15/03 50 WAIVER of Service of summons and complaint upon dft
Experian Info Solutn ; waiver sent on 6/13/03 (ld)
[Entry date 10/16/03]

10/15/03 51 WAIVER of Service of summons and complaint upon dft Craig
Smith ; waiver sent on 6/13/03 (ld) [Entry date 10/16/03]

10/15/03 52 WAIVER of Service of summons and complaint upon dft
ConsumerInfo.com ; waiver sent on 4/25/03 (ld)
[Entry date 10/16/03]

10/15/03 53 WAIVER of Service of summons and complaint upon dft Nelnet
Loan Svc Inc ; waiver sent on 3/28/03 (ld)
[Entry date 10/16/03]

10/15/03 54 WAIVER of Service of summons and complaint upon dft
Household ; waiver sent on 4/25/03 (ld)
[Entry date 10/16/03]

10/15/03 55 WAIVER of Service of summons and complaint upon dft Verizon
Wireless ; waiver sent on 4/25/03 (ld) [Entry date 10/16/03]

10/15/03 56 RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED summons/complaint upon dft FCC
by certified mail in Washington, DC on 9/22/03 (ld)
[Entry date 10/16/03]

10/15/03 57 RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED summons/complaint upon dft FTC
by certified mail in Washington, DC on 9/22/03 (ld)
[Entry date 10/16/03]

10/15/03 58 RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED summons/complaint upon dft
American Credit Agcy by service upon Sheri Cardella,
Registered Agent, in Torrance, CA on 7/1/03 (ld)
[Entry date 10/16/03]

10/15/03 59 CROSS-MOTION to compel Compass Bank to answer by pla
Christine Baker [59-1] and RESPONSE (OBJECTION) to motion
to Dismiss as to dft Compass Bank by dft Compass Bank
[38-1] by pla Christine Baker (ld) [Entry date 10/16/03]

10/16/03 60 ORIGINAL DECLARATIONS of Julie Wiedner and Zulkifli Iljas
re motion to Dismiss Complaint for Lack of Personal
Jurisdiction by dft Pacific Bell [43-1] by dft Pacific Bell
(ld) [Entry date 10/17/03]

10/16/03 61 PROOF OF SERVICE by dft Pacific Bell of original
declarations of Julie Wiedner and Zulkifli Iljas (ld)
[Entry date 10/20/03]

10/20/03 62 Notice of ERRATA by dft Compass Bank that Exhibits 1-6 to
Motion to Dismiss as to dft Compass Bank by dft Compass
Bank [38-1] were omitted and are attached to this notice
(sat) [Entry date 10/21/03]

10/20/03 62 EXHIBITS 1 through 6 re: Motion to Dismiss as to dft
Compass Bank by dft Compass Bank [38-1] by dft Compass Bank
(sat) [Entry date 10/21/03]

10/21/03 63 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] (sat)
[Entry date 10/22/03]

10/21/03 64 NOTICE OF HEARING by dft Fair Isaac & Company, dft Thomas G
Grudnowski, dft Barry Paperno, dft Thomas J Quinn setting
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] at 11:00
1/26/04 (sat) [Entry date 10/22/03]

10/22/03 65 ORDER by Judge Robert C. Broomfield granting motion for
admission pro hac vice as to Steven D Rathfon, atty for dft
Pacific Bell [40-1] (cc: all counsel) (sat)
[Entry date 10/22/03]

10/24/03 66 REPLY Memorandum by dft Compass Bank to response to Motion
to Dismiss as to dft Compass Bank by dft Compass Bank
[38-1] (sat) [Entry date 10/27/03]

10/27/03 67 RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED summons/complaint upon Celeste
Kromfuls for dft Pacific Bell on 9/18/03 (sat)
[Entry date 10/29/03]

11/3/03 68 MOTION for admission pro hac vice as to Stephen H Turner,
atty for dft American Credit Agcy, dft Tom Wells [68-1] (sat)
[Entry date 11/06/03]

11/6/03 -- Pro Hac Vice $25 Fee Paid as to Stephen H Turner (bas)
[Entry date 11/06/03]

11/6/03 69 RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED summons/complaint upon Shanna
Brewer for dft Compass Bank on 10/24/03 (sat)
[Entry date 11/06/03]

11/6/03 70 MOTION to Dismiss Robert Gray aka Bobby Grantham as to
dft Robert Gray by pla [70-1] (sat) [Entry date 11/06/03]

11/6/03 71 RESPONSE (Objection/Responsive Memorandum) by pla to Motion
to Dismiss Complaint for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction by
dft Pacific Bell [43-1] (sat) [Entry date 11/06/03]

11/14/03 72 ORDER by Judge Robert C. Broomfield granting motion for
admission pro hac vice as to Stephen H Turner, atty for dft
American Credit Agcy, dft Tom Wells [68-1] (cc: all
counsel) (sat) [Entry date 11/14/03]

11/17/03 73 REPLY by dft Pacific Bell to Plaintiff's response
(Opposition) to Motion to Dismiss Complaint for Lack of
Personal Jurisdiction by dft Pacific Bell [43-1] (sat)
[Entry date 11/18/03]

11/17/03 74 PROOF OF SERVICE of Pacific Bell Telephone Company's Reply
to Objection to Motion to Dismiss and Responsive Memorandum
by dft Pacific Bell (sat) [Entry date 11/18/03]

11/18/03 75 ORDER by Judge Robert C. Broomfield that Plaintiff
Christine Baker's Motion to Dismiss [70-1] came on
regularly for hearing before the Honorable Robert C
Broomfield, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the complaint as to
Robert Gray aka Bobby Grantham is dismissed without
prejudice (cc: all counsel) (sat) [Entry date 11/18/03]

11/18/03 76 MOTION to extend time to 12/22/03 to answer complaint
[1-1] by dft FTC, dft FCC, dft Federal Reserve Bk R [76-1]
(dmt) [Entry date 11/19/03]

11/19/03 77 NOTICE by dft Compass Bank of filing proposed order (lsb)
[Entry date 11/21/03]

11/19/03 78 PROOF OF SERVICE by dfts FTC, FCC, Federal Reserve Bank to
all re extension request (lsb) [Entry date 11/21/03]

11/25/03 79 WAIVER of Service of summons and complaint upon dft
Providian ; waiver sent on 9/15/03 (sat)
[Entry date 11/26/03]

11/25/03 80 WAIVER of Service of summons and complaint upon dft Federal
Reserve Bk R ; waiver sent on 10/14/03 (sat)
[Entry date 11/26/03]

11/25/03 81 WAIVER of Service of summons and complaint upon dft James
McAfee ; waiver sent on 10/14/03 (sat) [Entry date 11/26/03]

11/25/03 82 RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED summons/complaint upon Carol
Totty for dft Capital One on 11/11/03 (sat)
[Entry date 11/26/03]

11/25/03 83 RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED summons/complaint upon Pat
Norris for dft Harry Gambill on 11/6/03 (sat)
[Entry date 11/26/03]

11/25/03 84 RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED summons/complaint upon Pat
Norris for dft Trans Union LLC on 11/6/03 (sat)
[Entry date 11/26/03]

11/25/03 85 CROSS-MOTION to Amend her Complaint [1-1] by pla [85-1]
(amended complaint not submitted) and RESPONSE (Objection)
to 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] by pla (sat)
[Entry date 11/26/03]

11/25/03 86 ANSWER to complaint [1-1] and Affirmative Defensese by dft
Trans Union LLC (sat) [Entry date 11/26/03]

11/25/03 87 MOTION 12(b)(2) to Dismiss complaint [1-1] for Lack of
Personal Jurisdiction by dft Harry Gambill [87-1] and
alternative 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 11/26/03]

11/25/03 88 MOTION for admission pro hac vice as to Amanda Stamps
Lewis, atty for dft Trans Union LLC, dft Harry Gambill
[88-1] (sat) [Entry date 11/26/03]

11/25/03 90 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by dft Trans Union LLC (jrh)
[Entry date 12/02/03]

11/26/03 89 ORDER by Judge Robert C. Broomfield granting motion for
admission pro hac vice as to Amanda Stamps Lewis, atty for
dft Trans Union LLC, dft Harry Gambill [88-1] (cc: all
counsel) (sat) [Entry date 11/26/03]

11/26/03 -- Pro Hac Vice $25 Fee Paid as to Amanda S Lewis (bas)
[Entry date 11/26/03]

12/1/03 91 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by dft Capital One (sat)
[Entry date 12/03/03]

12/1/03 92 MOTION to Dismiss as to dft Capital One by dft Capital One
[92-1] (sat) [Entry date 12/03/03]

12/5/03 93 REPLY by dft Fair Isaac & Company, dft Thomas G Grudnowski,
dft Barry Paperno, dft Thomas J Quinn to response in
Support of Motion to Dismiss on Behalf of dft Fair Isaac &
Company, dft 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] (sat)
[Entry date 12/09/03]

12/5/03 94 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by dft Compass Bank (sat)
[Entry date 12/09/03]

12/15/03 95 MOTION to Exceed Page Limitations for their doc(s) Motion
to Dismiss by dft Federal Reserve Bk R, dft James McAfee
[95-1] (Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond's and James
McAffee Esq's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint is
lodged at docket clerk's desk) (sat) [Entry date 12/18/03]

12/15/03 -- LODGED Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint by dft
Federal Reserve Bk R, dft James McAfee (held at docket
clerk's desk) (sat) [Entry date 12/18/03]

12/15/03 -- LODGED Notice of Hearing re Motion to Dismiss by dft Federal
Reserve Bk R, dft James McAfee (pending ruling on motion to
exceed page limitation re motion to dismiss) (lodged at
docket clerk's desk) (sat) [Entry date 12/18/03]
[Edit date 12/18/03]

12/18/03 96 ORDER by Judge Robert C. Broomfield pursuan to
Defendants' Motion for Extension of Time [76-1] in which to
file an answer or other responsive pleading to the
complaint in above-captioned action, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED
granting defendants, Federal Communications Commission,
Federal Reserve Bank and Federal Trade Commission, until
12/22/03 within which to file their Answer or other
responsive pleading (cc: all counsel) (sat)
[Entry date 12/18/03]

12/18/03 97 ORDER by Judge Robert C. Broomfield granting Defendants'
Motion to Exceed Page Limitations for their doc(s) Motion
to Dismiss by dft Federal Reserve Bk R, dft James McAfee
[95-1]; vacating [0-0] lodged document Federal Reserve Bank
of Richmond's and James McAfee Esq's Motion to Dismiss
Plaintiff's Complaint, vacating [0-0] lodged document
Notice of Hearing re Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond's and
James McAfee Esq's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint
(cc: all counsel) (sat) [Entry date 12/18/03]

12/18/03 98 MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint as to dft Federal
Reserve Bk R, dft James McAfee by dft Federal Reserve Bk R,
dft James McAfee (sat) [Entry date 12/18/03]

12/18/03 99 NOTICE OF HEARING by dft Federal Reserve Bk R, dft James
McAfee setting Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint as
to dft Federal Reserve Bk R, dft James McAfee by dft
Federal Reserve Bk R, dft James McAfee at 11:00 4/5/04 (sat)
[Entry date 12/18/03]

12/18/03 100 CROSS-MOTION (Request) for Extension of Time to Serve
Capital One Financial Corporation by pla [100-1] and
RESPONSE (Objection) to Motion to Dismiss as to dft Capital
One by dft Capital One [92-1] by pla (sat)
[Entry date 12/22/03]

12/22/03 101 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] (lsb) [Entry date 12/30/03]

12/23/03 102 REPLY by dft Capital One Bank to response to motion to
Dismiss as to dft Capital One by dft Capital One [92-1] (lsb)
[Entry date 12/31/03]

12/23/03 103 MOTION to dismiss case and memorandum of points and
authorities by dfts Equifax Credit Information Services,
Tom Chapman [103-1] (lsb) [Entry date 12/31/03]

12/23/03 104 Notice of filing original AFFIDAVIT of James McAfee, Esq.
in support of motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint as to
dfts Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, James McAfee by dft
Federal Reserve Bk R, dft James McAfee [98-1] by dft
Federal Reserve Bk R, dft James McAfee (lsb)
[Entry date 12/31/03]

12/31/03 105 NOTICE of Trans Union and Harry Gambill Mailings to
Incorrect Address for Plaintiff by pla (sat)
[Entry date 01/06/04]

12/31/03 105 MOTION (Request) for Extension of Time until 1/29/04 to
Respond to Harry Gambill's Motion to Dismiss by pla
[105-1] (sat) [Entry date 01/06/04]

1/8/04 106 RESPONSE by dft Trans Union LLC, dft Harry Gambill to
Plaintiff's Motion (Request) for Extension of Time until
1/29/04 to Respond to Harry Gambill's Motion to Dismiss by
pla [105-1] (sat) [Entry date 01/13/04]

1/16/04 107 NOTICE by pla Christine Baker of Change of Address to: HC
37, Box 2126, Meadview, AZ 86444 (sat) [Entry date 01/20/04]

1/16/04 108 MOTION (Request) for Permission of Telephonic Appearance
by pla [108-1] (sat) [Entry date 01/20/04]

1/16/04 109 MOTION to Dismiss Defendant Providian Financial
Corporation With Prejudice as to dft Providian by pla
[109-1] (sat) [Entry date 01/20/04]

1/16/04 110 RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED summons/complaint upon Cayward
Wiggins for dft Equifax Credit on 12/5/03 (sat)
[Entry date 01/20/04]

1/16/04 111 RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED summons/complaint upon dft Barry
Paperno on 9/24/03 (sat) [Entry date 01/20/04]

1/16/04 112 RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED summons/complaint upon dft
Thomas J Quinn on 9/22/03 (sat) [Entry date 01/20/04]

1/16/04 113 RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED summons/complaint upon Nancy
Fraser for dft Thomas G Grudnowski on 9/25/03 (sat)
[Entry date 01/20/04]

1/16/04 114 RETURN OF SERVICE EXECUTED summons/complaint upon Nancy
Fraser for dft Fair Isaac & Company on 9/22/03 (sat)
[Entry date 01/20/04]

1/21/04 115 MOTION for admission pro hac vice as to Lewis P. Perling,
atty for dft Equifax Credit [115-1] (sat)
[Entry date 01/22/04]

1/23/04 -- Pro Hac Vice $25 Fee Paid as to Lewis P Perling (bas)
[Entry date 01/23/04]

1/23/04 116 MINUTE ORDER: The Court Orders setting oral argument as to
defendant's, Capital One, Motion to Dismiss [92-1] on
Monday, April 5, 2004 at 11:00 a.m., which is the same date
and time set for oral argument as to defendants', Federal
Reserve Bank and James McAfee, Motion to Dismiss [98-1].
(cc: RCB, all counsel) [116-1] (kbet) [Entry date 01/23/04]

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]

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)
(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]

2/26/04 143 RESPONSE (titled "Reply") by pla to Motion for Security for
Costs by dft Trans Union LLC [132-1] (sat)
[Entry date 02/27/04]

2/27/04 144 Supplemental MEMORANDUM by dft Federal Reserve Bk R, dft
James McAfee re 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 03/01/04] [Edit date 03/01/04]

3/2/04 145 ORDER by Judge Robert C. Broomfield granting Motion for
Summary Disposition by dft Federal Reserve Bk R, dft James
McAfee [124-1]; FURTHER ORDERED granting the Federal
Reserve Bank of Richmond's and Mr James McAfee, Esq's
Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint [98-1] and all
causes of action contained therein are dismissed with
prejudice against the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond and
Mr James McAfee Esq. Each party to bear its own attorneys'
fees and costs; party Federal Reserve Bk R dismissed, party
James McAfee dismissed (cc: all counsel) (sat)
[Entry date 03/02/04]

The crappy work of the US Attorney's office

I was copying from their motion for extension of time to answer because I realized last night how much is wrong with the MIS (CreditData SW) credit reports. It is going take MANY hours to go through their exhibits.

Anyway, so I noticed on the Federal Defendants' motion that they claimed to have sent the original to me and there is nothing about a filing with the court:

Big deal? Not to me. But I think I'd be in trouble if I sent the originals to the defendants instead of the court. And it just shows how dangerous it is to copy other peoples' work, and that's all I'm doing.

This filing was signed by Assistant U.S. Attorney Suzanne M. Chynoweth.

They also didn't change my address as I requested in January. Typical. The government at work.

Scanned CreditData SW motion - more on the non profit status

I posted the CreditData SouthWest Motion for Summary Judgment and Statement of Facts.

It's a job scanning all the exhibits, hopefully will get that done soon.

Actually, it's Merchant Information Solutions (MIS) and they sold the tradename CreditData SW to Experian last August.

John Fry, their attorney, called me after my last posting on MIS to clarify that he didn't mean to insult me. I asked then whether I could get the MIS tax returns, and he didn't think so.

While it's not related to my suit, this interests me tremendously. There is NO way that operating a CRA can be a non profit activity.

While it is legit for a non profit to engage in for profit activities, the income from the for profit activities is taxable. At least that's how it was last time I looked into that, back in the 90s.

Mr. Fry told me that they're a member organization, the members are the merchants. The CRA activities are certainly not for the merchants, as most likely none of the companies on my credit are MIS members. As they emphasize, they are not a national CRA. And it's unlikely that any of the member merchants ever ordered my credit. So the CRA activity has nothing to do with the membership organization.

In their motion they claim that their failure to provide a toll free number for consumers is due to their NOT being a national CRA. Can someone explain why Experian has record profits, and MIS is a NON profit organization, but wouldn't even provide a tollfree number for consumers?

I called them after I filed suit, so that's not in my complaint, and it was one of the most frustrating calls. They refused my phone dispute entirely!

Anyway, it is an outrage that the law doesn't require all non profit organizations to make their income tax returns public. I've also asked ACORN a few months ago for their financials and didn't get a response. In my experience, at least 50% of all non profits are for profit businesses in disguise.

It is disgusting how many people establish non profits only to skim the profit into their friends' and relatives' bank accounts.

I've done several investigations into fake non profits, wasn't cardratings.ORG one too? I'll have to do a search. I think there are some postings at the old Discus forum.

Many of the "non profit" credit counseling agencies are now being sued and it is common knowledge that they are diverting ther profits. Amerix/Genus comes to mind.

Well, the non profit status is a totally different aspect, most interesting. If you know anything about that, please do contact me. If there's a chance that they did NOT pay tax on the profits from the CRA activities, I won't hesitate to contact the IRS.

GARY LESHAW, Georgia Democratic Candidate for U.S. Senate

He has nice video to watch online at http://www.groupcommunications.com/leshaw/frames.htm Of course the advertisements always sound good, but it's interesting.

I'm looking forward to slow week and putting some promotional material about credit scores together. There's so much cool stuff one can do, but it all takes time.

FRB & James McAfee Notice of Errata

I did have 30 days to respond, but the Notice of Errata contains a new error!

I guess math and logic aren't requirements for law school. Here's the excerpt from the filing:

"Counsel for Defendants Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond and Mr. James McAfee, Esq. (collectively "Defendants") apprise the Court that the Defendants' Motion for Summary Disposition and the Defendants' Supplemental Memorandum Re Defendants' Motion for Summary Disposition ("Supplemental Memorandum") incorrectly stated that Plaintiff's Response to the Motion to Dismiss was due no later than January 2, 2004. Plaintiff's Response to the Motion to Dismiss was actually due no later than January 20, 2004. Therefore, as of the date of the filing of Defendants' Supplemental Memorandum, February 27, 2004, Plaintiff's Response to the Motion to Dismiss was six weeks late, rather than seven weeks that was set forth in the Defendants' Supplemental Memorandum."

WOW, talk about convoluted and more funny math! Without looking at a calendar or calculator, I've got one question:

The difference between 1/2 and 1/20 is almost 3 weeks. So why was I supposedly 6 weeks late instead of 7 weeks?

Hmmmmm ....... And I couldn't even find that where they wrote 7 weeks previously.

And I sure find it odd that they don't know the local rules. Does anyone belief that this was an "error?"

It's not relevant in this case because I was late even if I had mailed the 1/29/04 version of my reply and consent to dismissal. I don't want to argue bizarre laws I know nothing about. The most important part was to get my filings and exhibits on the docket and of course to the defendants.

But on 1/28 they claimed that my reply was due on the 1/2, and at that time there certainly was a significant difference between the 2nd and the 20th. I still don't know what I should have done after the 1/28 filing. Respond to the motion to dismiss right away, and then submit a 2nd filing within the 30 days allowed for the 1/28 filing? They also claimed that I had only 10 days to reply to that filing, I don't know ..... It sure would be good to know for NEXT time and of course for the other pro se litigants reading here.

I really never wanted to litigate how demented Mr. McAfee is.

Now I know that the law requires that they have to give me a substantive response to my complaint within 15 days, according to their filing.

Mr. McAfee has all the Balance/Limit sample calculations attached to my 3/1/04 filing and hopefully they're idiot proof!

I'm going to start this fresh. New claim, same issue, press releases, and maybe some legislators or lawyers with a conscience will pick up the pieces and do whatever it takes to get the FRB to enforce the FCRA and require that Capital One reports the credit limits.

It's bizarre that they have a fit over literally just a few days in January, but I've been waiting for a reply for 1 year and 3 months and I STILL don't know what happened with Mr. McAfee's investigation!

Ms. Welsh and Mr. Maraz:

Could you plese let me know how those 15 days are calculated?

Can YOU calculate your balance/limit ratio?

Gary Leshaw for U.S. Senate?

I got an e-mail with his election site http://www.leshawforsenate.com/

"Notification:

"From Gary Leshaw

Candidate for the United States Senate

An email will arrive in your mailbox on Thurs., March 4 that promises to change the way candidates interact with voters. Gary Leshaw for Senate will contact you using breakthrough technology that no other candidate has employed. It will allow you to get to know Gary, face to face — and for him to get to know you, if you so wish."

http://www.leshawforsenate.com/bio.htm

"... In the past two years, Gary has defended the rights of senior citizens taken advantage of by unscrupulous contractors and caught in a bureaucratic nightmare with the Atlanta Bureau of Housing. A number of contractors who had been paid federal money to correct building code violations in the homes of Atlanta seniors, failed to complete or adequately perform the jobs assigned them, leaving elderly citizens with living conditions worse than before they received aid.

Since 1993 Gary also has served as a part-time magistrate judge for DeKalb County. ..."

http://www.lawyers.com/garyleshaw&associates/jsp2221165.jsp

"Practice Areas: Civil Rights; Civil Law; Consumer Law; Class Actions."

CIC 96% and 98% B/L ratio, and no soft inquiries

The FRB-R & McAfee exhibits, including the CIC trimerged report, my B/L calculations and the letter to Experian/CIC.

My B/L ratio according to the CIC tri-merged reported numbers should be 38%, is 42%, 43% and 65%.

The kicker: CIC reports 96% and 98% B/L ratios!

I posted my entire annotated CIC report, even got their snake oil scores since I can't get the FICO scores for Equifax and TU.

The letter to Courtney Vaudreuil, the Experian/CIC attorney with Jones Day, is Exhibit AN-2.

Can't wait for the Experian/CIC reply!

Prison time for James McAfee ...

... if he doesn't tell Capital One to report the credit limits now.

I scanned and posted my Objection and Exhibits.

If Mr. McAfee doesn't at least take some action to get Capital One to report the limits now, he can just wait for some attorney to hold him personally liable for a suicide due to financial and credit problems. He's definitely not going to be able to claim that he didn't know.

I despise people like James McAfee. He has no shame. He doesn't even mind submitting filings and affidavits that make him look like he has an IQ below 50. He might as well walk around with a sign on his forehead: "I am stupid!"

The attorney readers might think this is brilliant, but then they're also missing the point, like most people:

"While Mr. McAfee and his attorneys celebrate the dismissal and then go on to increasing their net worth, thousands of people will lose their homes and families and some will die, because Mr. McAfee refuses to enforce the FCRA."

If I believed in hell, I'd say that's where he'll end up. Since I don't, I just hope that he has some conscience, and finally does what he was supposed to do years ago:

Do whatever it takes to get Capital One to report the credit limits.

Yesterday I mailed my objection, today they were dismissed. But considering that I agreed to dismiss in my previous versions of the filing, it's not very important. Although, it is odd that Thomas Maraz and Maureen Welsh, attorneys for the Federal Reserve Bank and James McAfee, claimed that I had only 10 days to respond to the motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and their subsequent motion for summary disposition. The way I read the local rules, I had 30 days.

It's also odd that they filed their motion on Friday and Judge Broomfield signed the order to dismiss on Monday.

And if anyone has a serious interest in pursuing this matter, maybe someone with legal skills, please let me know and I'll scan and post their filings.

Greenspan recommending ARMs

This is really strange. Maybe he ought to consider retiring to enjoy his social security benefits.

Fed chief pushing ARMs

America is drowning in fraud

I got an e-mail claiming that my order for a $2,500 notebook was delayed, it couldn't be shipped for a month.

Thing is, the notebook I ordered in January has long been delivered and it was only $2,000. So what's that?

Another scam to get my banking info. There's a link to get info on the order, and it isn't the smartest thing to click on those links in the first place.

But, obviously, I'm concerned that someone else placed an order in my name OR that somehow I got the notice in error.

Anyway, they want you to enter your bank or debit card info to cancel the order if you don't want to wait a month for the notebook to be shipped.

As you can see below, the domain was just purchased on 2/27 for the sole purpose of getting people's banking info.

Domain Name: ROYALBILLING.BIZ
Domain ID: D6370729-BIZ
Sponsoring Registrar: CSL COMPUTER SERVICE (D.B.A. JOKER.COM)
Domain Status: ok
Registrant ID: CNEU-97343
Registrant Name: scott sherrier
Registrant Organization: personal
Registrant Address1: 87 park drive
Registrant City: kenilworth
Registrant State/Province: NJ
Registrant Postal Code: 07033
Registrant Country: United States
Registrant Country Code: US
Registrant Phone Number: +908.2721986
Registrant Email: firstjohnhan@yahoo.com
Administrative Contact ID: CNEU-97342
Administrative Contact Name: scott sherrier
Administrative Contact Organization: personal
Administrative Contact Address1: 87 park drive
Administrative Contact City: kenilworth
Administrative Contact State/Province: NJ
Administrative Contact Postal Code: 07033
Administrative Contact Country: United States
Administrative Contact Country Code: US
Administrative Contact Phone Number: +908.2721986
Administrative Contact Email: firstjohnhan@yahoo.com
Billing Contact ID: CNEU-97342
Billing Contact Name: scott sherrier
Billing Contact Organization: personal
Billing Contact Address1: 87 park drive
Billing Contact City: kenilworth
Billing Contact State/Province: NJ
Billing Contact Postal Code: 07033
Billing Contact Country: United States
Billing Contact Country Code: US
Billing Contact Phone Number: +908.2721986
Billing Contact Email: firstjohnhan@yahoo.com
Technical Contact ID: CNEU-97342
Technical Contact Name: scott sherrier
Technical Contact Organization: personal
Technical Contact Address1: 87 park drive
Technical Contact City: kenilworth
Technical Contact State/Province: NJ
Technical Contact Postal Code: 07033
Technical Contact Country: United States
Technical Contact Country Code: US
Technical Contact Phone Number: +908.2721986
Technical Contact Email: firstjohnhan@yahoo.com
Name Server: A.NS.JOKER.COM
Name Server: B.NS.JOKER.COM
Name Server: C.NS.JOKER.COM
Created by Registrar: CSL COMPUTER SERVICE (D.B.A. JOKER.COM)
Domain Registration Date: Fri Feb 27 18:47:33 GMT 2004
Domain Expiration Date: Sat Feb 26 23:59:59 GMT 2005

Russ Whitney and Rothstein, Rosenfeldt, Dolin & Pancier can take a hike!

They sent me a "Cease & Desist" because I link to John T. Reed's site.

What are they SMOKING??????

I haven't thought about Russ Whitney in a long time, although bayhouse.com is found a lot in searches for "Russ Whitney." Years ago at the old forum many readers asked about his credentials when I still had a real estate section.

Of course I know that now that I posted at this blog, it also will be found by many people looking for info about Russ Whitney. So:

Do NOT order Whitney's programs and sucker seminar and bird dog stuff.

Do NOT order anyone else's real estate sucker seminars either.

A few years ago I bought "As seen on TV!" Russ Whitney's "Building Wealth" and I thought I'd read it and review it since so many people asked about him. Well, I never did. If anyone wants the book, please paypal me $3 for shipping and I'll send it to you. It's something to read to motivate yourself if you want to get started in real estate, but don't rely on the book as God's word.

I've been hearing commercials for Robert Allen again too. I read that his "no money down" crap got him to file for bankruptcy.

I have NEVER verified anyone getting their money's worth at any one of the various "boot camps" and "seminars."

The testimonials are FALSE and/or PAID for.

I have quite a few years of real estate experience, was actively working as licensed Buyer Broker in California in the 90s and let me tell you something: Making money is hard! There's a lot to learn and the more money you have, the more likely you are to succeed. "Staying power" is key. I almost lost everything myself and had to wait 8 years to be able to make a profit on my last house in California. Markets go up and they go down. That's just how it is.

And don't confuse the guru sucker seminars for thousands of dollars with the seminars by and for professionals for a few hundred or less. Jim Little and Robert Bruss come to mind as EXCELLENT instructors - do a web search. Jim Napier's seminars on notes were good too, but he may have retired.

And don't forget your community colleges, some have outstanding programs. I was priveliged to be able to attend the Bob Bruss "Legal Aspects of Real Estate" twice in the late 80s at the College of San Mateo.

Russ Whitney must be a better sucker magnet than Robert Allen, because he's got lots of extra cash to hand over to Rothstein, Rosenfeldt, Dolin & Pancier for the most ridiculous waste of time mailings I've ever seen.

It's not that I don't get the occasional attorney requests for "deletions", which I of course ignore as it is my policy not to delete accurate data, but nobody has had the audacity to send me a Cease & Desist for a LINK!

The above link is the 2nd link I posted to John Reed today. But here's something you just HAVE to look at if you want to know what this is about:

John T. Reed’s main page about Russ Whitney

Clearly, Whitney has nothing on Reed or these LINKS to the many pages with negative info about Whitney wouldn't be there.

Apparently, everything Reed says about Whitney is TRUE and Whitney's lawyers now resorted to threatening site owners who link to Reed.

Another interesting link is http://www.johntreed.com/Whitneyfax.html

I'll send Reed a copy of this posting too, maybe it will be helpful in his case against Whitney. If I were him, I'd file a counterclaim. I'm sure that MANY site owners deleted the links to his site.

This is NOT an endorsement of John Reed, as I have not researched him. Well, maybe I did, years ago, but I can't recall. :)

c: johnreed@johntreed.com
srothstein@rrdplaw.com

Below are the scans of the "Cease & Desist" demand:

Is that crazy or what?????

They sent this certified mail & 1st class, they spent $4.79 per mailing just on postage (not to mention the research) to how many site owners? Thousands?

It's mail day

I finally sent out the Federal Reserve Bank/McAfee response, more on that later, and I got a whole bunch of mail from Cottonwood.

The US Attorney's Office in Phoenix didn't change my address as I had requested, but their response was meaningless anyway. They're talking jurisdiction, I'm talking issues.

Got a mailing from CPA Vincent for someone else, the usual misdelivery.

A gazillion catalogs, well, at least several pounds.

A certified and a 1st class letter from Rothstein, Rosenfeldt, Dolin & Pancier, P.A. It's a "cease & desist" -- apparently I link to www.johntreed.com somewhere, and they don't like that. I'll try to scan that later. Note that I'm posting ANOTHER link, because I link to whoever I want to. Some of these lawyers got to be dumber than rocks.

I got a TON of bills, and I could waste at least 10 hours reading all the fine print in new terms and crap. Already spent hours just opening and filing stuff, I guess I'll have to set some time aside for the insurance policy.

Did glance at a letter from Cap One about MONTHLY FEES. More on that later too.

Discover DECLINED my application due to my low TU credit score.

I got a credit card offer from First Premier, more on that later too.

A letter to "Sister Christine Baker" had me wondering whether I got on a religious marketing list, but it was a wedding invitation from friends. Unfortunately I can't go, it's in Maryland, no time .....

I recently bought a new notebook and since VISA doubles the manufacturers warranty, I registered it online. Now they wrote that I need to send in the invoice, manufacturer warranty and credit card slip. I don't know that I have all that, ordered online. More chores ...

Compass Bank keeps inviting me to apply for credit, but they already declined me.

Got the affiliate commission check from Equifax, but not CreditExpert. Wonder what happened.

I'm also on numerous legal lists, and the Consumer Financial Services Law Report wants me to subscribe. "Keeping up with the latest developments in consumer financial services litigation - and one step ahead of your collegues - has been difficult and time-consuming."

There's a LOT more to say on that. I'm quite frustrated with the lack of knowledge by attorneys. I'm miles ahead of most, it's amazing how little they know about the FCRA and credit scores. Can you believe that an expert on FCRA litigation wrote to me that a bankruptcy is the worst that can happen to your credit, and that any subsequent incorrect reporting doesn't result in damages?

Yup. That's how ignorant bigshot attorneys are.

The NACA newsletter features an article by Arnold R. Levinson: "The Supreme Court's Shameful Descent into Disrepute." I see a lot about ERISA, and a section on the Bush v. Gore decision. Have to set some time aside for that. "... What I now see is the greatest arrogance and disrespect for the law from our highest court. And, if they can do it, so can everyone else." Yup. The FTC, the FCC, the Federal Reserve Banks, the Federal Reserve Board, .... They all do what they want.

And I must have gotten 6 or 7 soliciations from various non profits. That's really annoying and a good reason to donate to NOBODY.