Need to remove something on credit report

[Ameliaf]

What is the name of your state? SC

Okay...I need help with a credit reporting problem. Sometime back in 1995 a parent of mine opened up a credit card account and listed me as a secondary user. I never gave my permission or signed any documents to have my name added. I believe they added my name in case I would need to use the card in the future, so no malice was intended.

I never used the card nor did I even know my name was on it. Then in 2000 this same parent filed for bankruptcy and listed this card in his debt. Now in 2004 I am having trouble with my credit because the reporting agencies are showing me with a bankruptcy filing.

I have called the bank and explained my situation. They were extremely sympathic but in the end say that I had responsibility to that account (like a spouse would) and therefor cannot change the filing with the reporting agencies.

Do I have some way of fixing this? Can't I make them prove that I approved being added to the account? Wouldn't they have to have proof of me signing something? My parents did not realize that my credit would be affected when they filed. Do they have some power in fixing this? Shouldn't their bankruptcy attorney have caught this?

Please help!!

 

[bigun]

Yes, you do have some recourse.
Write a letter to the bank denying any knowledge of the account and demanding documentation that you have any responsibility. Send the letter CRRR. When the green card comes back, send a letter to the CRA's {again CRRR} saying the account is not yours.
You do have the right to take private action against a data provider. DF's must also follow reasonable procedures and may not report unverifable information. Here are a couple of court cases that establish a precedent. The FCRA allows you to sue in your local small claims court or, you can get a lawyer.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/4th/031235p.pdf

Johnson v. MBNA America Bank, NA
On 2/11/04, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals handed down its decision in this appeal, affirming a judgment entered against MBNA following a jury verdict in favor of plaintiff Johnson on a claim that MBNA violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act by failing to conduct a reasonable investigation of plaintiff's dispute concerning an MBNA account appearing on her credit report. MBNA's first contention was that the district court made an error when it ruled furnishers of credit information must perform a "reasonable" investigation of consumer disputes. MBNA, in essence, says there isn't a qualitiative component to the investigation provision that would allow a court or jury to assess whether the creditor's investigation was reasonable. The Court went back to the plain meaning of the term "investigation" and concluded it would make little sense to believe that Congress would use the term "investigation" to include superficial, unreasonable inquiries. The court therefore held that creditors must indeed conduct a "reasonable" investigation of their records after receiving notice of a consumer dispute from a credit reporting agency. The next issue, then, was whether the jury's determination that MBNA did not conduct a reasonable investigation was supported by the evidence. The Court looks at the steps MBNA took and finds that a jury could reasonably conclude that MBNA acted unreasonably. Although the disputed credit account was for $17,000, the jury found that Johnson's actual damages stemming from the incorrect information furnished by MBNA totaled $90,300. After finding that MBNA had negligently failed to comply with the FCRA, the jury awarded Johnson $90,300 and that verdict was upheld on appeal. There are many other issues discussed. Read the Court's opinion for complete details.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/9th/0015946p.pdf
Civil Liability under FCRA for Furnisher of Information
Nelson v. Chase Manhattan Mortgage Corporation
The issue in the case was whether the FCRA creates a cause of action for a consumer against a furnisher of credit information. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals held that the FCRA is to protect consumers against inaccurate and incomplete credit reporting and Section 1681s-2(b) provides a private remedy to injured consumers. Thus, a consumer can sue a company for furnishing inaccurate and/or incomplete information. In this case, the furnisher allegedly failed to take prompt and appropriate corrective action once it was notified that it had reported inaccurate information.

The key here is, you need to give the DF an opportunity to correct the record. You do that by both disputing with them and, getting a 3rd party invoved {the CRA's}.
Post at www.creditboards.com for some more ideas.

 

[Ameliaf]

Follow up question

Thank you bigun. Your advice is very helpful.

Can you clarify a few things? I apologize if these questions seem a bit silly. What is a CRRR and a DF?

 

[bigun]

DF is data provider. This would be the bank.

CRRR is certified, return receipt requested.

 

[Ameliaf]

What does a Creditor legally need to establish a account in your name?

Are they required to have some type of verification on file that it was indeed you that opened the account?

For this case it was my father who supposedly opened the account with me as joint. Is this something the bank should have even done without my consent? Do I have legall ground in saying that the account is not mine? According to the bank they say they need no verification at all and the account is mine and I am responsible for it regardless of whether I asked for it or not.

After a earlier discussion with them via phone comm they sent me a letter stating that they could not and would not report to the credit reporting agency that it is not my account.

So from here I should mail the creditor and all three credit reporting agencies saying basically "This isn't mine fix it please or send me some form of proof it is mine" And if this fails to rectify the situation my only option then is to talk to a lawyer for potential lawsuit?

 

[bigun]

Per the Fair Credit Reporting Act, information that is reported must be accurate AND verifable. This is what nailed MBNA. The info they were reporting was not verifiable.

http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fcra.htm

Here is a snippet from 611. In the Jognson vs MBNA case, the court apllied this to the furnisher of credit information.


(5) Treatment of inaccurate or unverifiable information.

(A) In general. If, after any reinvestigation under paragraph (1) of any information disputed by a consumer, an item of the information is found to be inaccurate or incomplete or cannot be verified, the consumer reporting agency shall promptly delete that item of information from the consumer's file or modify that item of information, as appropriate, based on the results of the reinvestigation.

Do as I suggested previously. Demand proof {a document bearing your signature} Dispute with the CRA's as not mine. If that doen't work, see a lawyer.

I 'd suggest it's pretty obvious they have nothing or, they would have sued you before the SOl ran out in SC>

 

[bigun]

Though this thread from creditboards might be of interest. He's gonna sue till they get it right,
http://www.creditboards.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=27192


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

OK, I'll call it a partial win, but still take the cash

The soap opera:

Ongoing tussle with Sears over an inaccurate tradeline. Multiple disputes through the Bureaus, then directly with Sears. A couple of days after my first contact with Sears, my file gets poisoned with a chargeoff being re-aged by 4+ yrs. Score tanks 40+ pts overnight.

Multiple letters follow, including BBB complaints, Sears pleads innocence with the now infamous "we can't control what the Credit Bureaus do with the information we give them". Basically turns into a circle jerk with the Bureaus and Sears saying it's the other who is responsible. Here's a tip I learned from this experience; If you get into a finger pointing deal like this, file with co-defendants. That way they can sit there and finger point before the judge rather than play ping-pong with your credit file and run you in circles with stonewalling letters.

So I file on Sears, they make no effort to resolve out of court, hire outside counsel the day of the hearing only to ask for continuance to work out a settlement. They sent a lawyer to the first hearing as well. Their terms are unacceptable, so the time is wasted. Hearing date #2 gets closer and outside Counsel #2 calls me up to dish out some "you're an idiot for sueing us" nonsense with some condescending frosting. Dunno why they canned Counsel #1. So I issue subpoenas all around. Sears doesn't respond with a signed original contract(what verifiable information?) and provides no evidence in court that they actually attempted to correct the information as they claimed in a series of letters to me. Judge even asked them for their proof. Nada. They don't have any. So we finish our little presentation, Judge takes away our pile of paper and later renders decision in my favor, but awards only $1k + costs. No mention or ruling on the requested injunctive relief.

So I call it a partial win because now I have to go back and sue them in a higher court. Seems to be some debate on whether or not I can get injunctive relief in small claims. When I read the California Civil Code it says yes, but others say no.

Doesn't change the fact that they are still reporting inaccurate, unverifiable and damaging information. And when the next round of disputes gets denied, I have a new cause for action.

I learned much from this experience. Some things I will do different next time. Filing in a higher court is one of them. I will also be better prepared to present and to counter their defense. But for a first time in court I'm not all that unhappy with the results. Seems their outside counsel just wants to run up the billable hours tab, so I'll be more than happy to keep him busy until they make this right. Eventually they may get tired of me being a royal PITA and do the right thing.

 

[empowerment]

I hear this quite often from people alleging that they did not know they were authorizing users of a credit card account. While this may be true in one aspect, however it would be consider hearsay. Would an affidavit from his parents help in this situation?

 

[Ameliaf]

Thank you!

Thank you. All this information has been very helpful. And I did actually have my father contact the bank and inform them that I had nothing to do with the account a long time back. Luckily, he had put in the request a while back before he filed and now they are removing my name. The only bad thing is that if I hadn't looked at my credit report I would not even know that they still hadn't removed my name from that account. Although the mistake was theirs it appears the onus was on me to make them fix it.