The answer is Yes, but you might wanna make sure and wait for another person here to confirm it as I am unsure. Better yet, why don't you ask the Lending Tree guys because they can help better...

Ok I won't flame you, but I won't try and explain any moral justification to you either. That's simply a choice you're going to have to make..

I hate it when someone wants to cram "their" version of ethics down everyone's throat It's a personal decision and should remain just that, personal..

Gib..

I agree it is a personal decision. The intent of the question was merely to gain perspectives from others, who have made that decision, to aid my own resolve...

I don't need to listen to Charles Manson or Mother Theresa to form my own moral perspective. Sorry, I just view these types of threads as inflammatory and a waste of time..

Gib..

Business ethics are pretty much an oxymoron, So the ethics become if any.

"it's your credit history and it's their business" Who are YOU ethically bound to assist..

Do your ethics permit gambling ? if not cancel your insurance.

As your are betting your premium that will not have wreck illness etc ..

You put in a claim insurance co loses the bet ..

Just like your loans part of the premium ( interest ) is to cover defaulted loans,.

I would bet that 99.9 % of the folks here if they knew in advance that they would end up in a credit crunch they would have have snipped cards years ago..

Ethics change due to conditions, conditions change due to life, life changes due to the world. The world changes due to time..

Time changes ethics.

Today it's not ethical to employ a child of 10 years old and have them work 12 hours a day 200 years ago it was OK.

Snip So true and you should just treat is as such.

This is a business situation...

I've been at the same point I think... I'm thrilled our credit is good but then some of the things I got off our reports were correct and accurate, but seriously derogatory...... so I felt guilty about disputing things just to make our scores better (it's the Catholic guilt thing I think...<G>). For me, morally it felt wrong, but I did it anyway..

However, I've sort of come to terms with it - no one seemed to worry about ethics and morals when they were charging us 29.99% on a loan. We're the same people. My husband has the same job and I'm still on SSD. Nothing has changed other than we're saving a boatload of money becuase our credit is now good and no one is calling our house or coming to our house becuase a payment is late..

So to answer your question - you're the only one who has to look at yourself in the mirror every day. If tweeking your credit is gonna cause you sleepless nights, than don't do it. However if paying outrageous interest rates because your credit isn't sterling is gonna cause you sleepless nights then there isn't much of a difference, other than you're only hurting yourself financially if you don't attempt to get yourself the best credit possible..

Just my unsolicited 02..

Ozzy...

Thanks for the honest answer...this is the type of input I was looking for...

I draw the line at having a completely clean report.

Anything beyond that is amoral..

These kind of questions,and there seem to be a lot of them here lateley[],have inspired me to ask the bigger question:.

Has anyone gotten back their $1200 bucks that every.

Man, woman, and child alive in America in the 1980's.

Got dinged for to bail out the S$L's who wouldn't lend.

Us any money to begin with?When mine comes in the mail I may consider your question.But for now I have a fiduciary responsibility to my family to get the best rates I can..

Ozzy, sorry about the Catholic thing but trust me, the.

Older you get, the better your knuckles start healing up!..

That's about the size of it..

If I can improve my family's life by 'cheating' a CRA or creditor and get away with it... well, they have 'cheated' me plenty of times and gotten away with it. I am morally bound to my family above all others, including you...

There's no need to be flamed, nor is the question irrelevant or inflammatory. I think people respond that way when they want to discourage people from asking.

Truly.

Important questions that, frankly, they are uncomfortable asking themselves. Your question is good and it shows, imo, a bit of character for you to even raise it. Good for you..

To answer it... I did not lie or say "not mine" when I was disputing things on my credit report. I should first say that I NEVER disputed a SINGLE thing directly with the CRA without going to the creditor first. For most accounts, I went the "goodwill" route, where I knew a creditor legally was not obligated to report the bad info. So, I asked, nicely, would you please remove it as a favor? Other creditors removed their items b/c they could not prove to me that what they were reporting was correct (and it.

Wasn't.

Correct), and they OF THEIR OWN ADMISSION agreed to remove the account..

It didn't always work. I had two paid collection accounts from my college that were absolutely correct and the college refused to remove them. They stayed on my reports until November of this year, when they fell off..

But in spite of those two accounts remaining, I got 13 accounts removed and I kept my self respect..

I cannot demand of creditors or CRAs legal truth and procedure in reporting (which is based on the moral absolute that truth is good and deceit is bad) what I myself am unwilling to give. It makes no sense to me to lie and scheme my way to a clean report while being willing to sue said creditors and CRAs in a heartbeat for lying and scheming in how the bad items are reported. That's hypocritical to me. And the argument that "they did it first" doesn't fly well with me, any more than my coming home from a fight saying "they hit me first" flew well with my parents..

And the truth is, is that if the tradeline is 100% accurate, neither the CRA or the creditor is lying or scheming..

As far as what reasoning I follow, if you read my post in this thread, you'll understand (hopefully) why I take the position that I do:.

Http://consumers.creditnet.com/strai...threadid=27190..

Plus they're faceless - you're not cheating a person, you're not hurting anyone by improving your credit - you're improving your quality of life - more $, less stress, etc. Why would making your life better and doing so without harming anyone else be a bad thing??!!!.

I was thinking the other day how I wish I'd known about asking CCCs to lower interets rates a while ago. I was practically raised on credit cards - my mom bought everything for us on credit - school clothes, medication, etc. I think she was probably still paying off my junior high school clothes long after I got married..

I know her credit cards were 18% - makes me sick now. She never missed a payment or went over the limit, but often struggled to make the minimum payment. My mom was always stressed about money and to be honest, I wonder if having known that you could ask a ccc to lower an APR would have added time to her life. I seriously think the stress of owing money at those horrible rates contributed to her heart condition. My mom had heart problems since I was a kid but the last heart attack was fatal on September 11, 2000..

Sorry to digress there - earlier I watched the Divine Secrets of the Ya Ya Sisterhood, and it just has me missin' my mom. Should be emotional warnings on video tapes......

Ozzy...

I'd like to commend marci for her above post, in that it was both well put and free of any divine imperatives ;).

Saar..

I applaud you for struggling with this issue. It shows character..

I struggled too with this when I first came here. But after about 1000 posts I finally resolved it. I'll tell ya how.

I.

Did it, hope it helps..

"I will exercise perfect moral and ethical character in my credit.

Repair.

Dealings, to the.

Precise extent.

My adversary is willing to do the same"..

As a result of adopting this philosophy, all 3 of my reports are crystal clear and so is my conscience..

Try that for starters...

Answer this then (to no one in particular):.

Scenario: You've been charged with criminal check-fraud, you know you are innocent and it's either a mistake or you've been set up, but you don't have much proof either way. The prosecution's case is a bit shaky as well. The pivitol element that ties it together is the 2 bad check items (accidental but yours) on your credit reports. Each item contains some technical inaccuracies but you know it is yours. Your attorney tells you pleading them as mistakes will not be convincing to a jury. Your only chance of avoiding prison time is to dispute their accuracy and get them removed from the credit reports.



0..

Ok here is my .02.

Life does not play fair, why should i?.

When it comes time to buy a house or a car, why should I be denied or raped on interest charges for circumstances I could not control?.

As long as my actions won't catch me a felony charge I consider them to be fair game..

The way I see it, the only morals and ethics in business are the little pieces of paper with "in god we trust" on them...

So scams, fraud, and other assorted ills are ok when making business deals because 'if the other person fell for it then they deserved what they got'?..

This is exactly why this conversation is healthy from time to time...

Incogneto,.

I'm not flaming you but I agree with Why Chat & Gib 100%. You have to decide for yourself if your going to strech the truth in that next dispute letter. You can start all the threads in the world asking others about ethics & morals but in the end it's all up to you..

In my Lending Tree credit repair efforts I did everything possible, including contacting the original creditors and asking them to remove the negative marks. For the most part it worked but not with all of them. So I decided to assert my right under the FCRA to dispute the negative info on my CR that I believed not to be accurate. I have no problems with what I did because the info wasn't 100% accurate and I had the right to dispute it...

Butch, they are not right but thats the way it is...

Thank you! That's kind of you..

:-).

The divine imperative is there, if one looks hard enough. Something along the lines of "he who has ears...".

It's just not my job to beat people over the head with it...

Very well said, Miami. There's absolutely nothing unethical about exercising your right to an accurate credit report under federal law. CRA's often act as though "substantially correct" is good enough, whether they're talking about a negative tradeline or a positive tradeline. You are certainly operating well with anyone's definition of ethical if you dispute a tradeline that contains an incorrect detail..

Because, under the law, the burden of proof is on the CRA's, you may also dispute any tradeline that you *believe* to be incorrect. Oftentimes, life events surrounding negative credit entries, such as divorce, job loss, or a death in the family, can cloud one's judgement. You may think you have an accurate memory of the history of that tradeline that appears on your credit report, but do you, considering the emotional stress you were in? I think in this case it would not be improper to ask for verification, and the dispute process is the only way to do this..

If you encountered a tradeline on your credit report, and you had in your files complete documentation including the original note or agreement with your signature, any additional terms of agreement including all notices of change of terms, a complete payment history and a complete correspondance history, and every single detail about the tradeline on your CR corresponded exactly with your documentation, then I think it might easily be considered unethical to dispute that tradeline. I question how many of us, even with excellent credit, are in that situation with even a single tradeline on our credit reports...

Good topic for debate, and I'm with Butch in that it's good to air out the philosophical directives behind ones actions from time to time..

To answer the original posters questions.... from my own personal experience in credit repair..

Actions which were acceptable to me:.

1) Asking the CRA to validate the entry (if it's a legitimate debt and they are a legitimate CRA, they should have no problem here).

2) Asking that the CRAs comply with all regulations..

Actions which were unacceptable to me.

1) Disputing an item which was correct.

2) Using a false pretense for a dispute.

One note about the ethics I employed in my credit reapir process... I never let my ethics be dictated by another party. Meaning I did not adjust my ethics because of whom I was dealing with. To me, a moral act is independent of the situation. A lie is a lie, wether you tell it to a priest, your grandmother, or a CA. To me, it doesn't matter what the intentions of the other party are.

By doing so, you essentially let someone else dictate what is ethical and what isnt..

But thats just me..

Wichita..

Is it moral for a creditor or credit reporting agency to wreck your credit or chances of obtaining such for a period of 7 years??.

Most criminals who committ very immoral crimes get less jail time then this!.

Most state's statute of limitations are well below 7 years..

Does it seem moral or make sense that 3 different CRA's and maybe even more get large kickbacks and payments from creditors for reporting your credit and reputation for profit?.

Does it seem moral that when you contact a CRA or OC to advise them to follow the law and they continue to go ahead and break it over and over make any sense??.

I'll dispute anything that I want which is adversely effecting me, moral or not..

If CRA's or OC's do not want to follow the law then they can write me out a very nice check for their immoral ways, as I'll sleep very good at night..

Tac..

Bingo!.

In many cases, credit reports do NOT reflect our current situation. I made mistakes. I paid for them..

I pay EVERYTHING on time now, and intend to continue doing so..

Yet, I have to suffer for 4-5-6 more years?.

Look at it this way....

If I was a millionalre 2 years ago, but now have nothing, would the proper thing to do be to continue treating me as a millionaire for the next 5 years?.

The credit laws do this, in reverse..

I'm only trying to get an ACCURATE representation of my CURRENT risk..

Radi8..

Is malicious gossip moral?.

(And I ask that question knowing that there are some malicious gossips in the audience.).

Well, if you don't think it is, then you can't pretend that the whole CRA system is moral and that it's immoral to interfere with it. Credit reports are just malicious gossip that's reduced to written form and sold to anyone who wants an excuse to cheat you..

If I have a problem paying Citibank, for example, it's no one's business but Citibank's. It should affect my relationship with Citbank, provided they apply their internal rules fairly and equally. But it should never affect my relationship with anyone else..

We conform to the whole credit reporting and.

Credit scoring system because we enjoy the conceit that it's possible to get a $5000 credit card overnight..

It is for some, but we all pay a price to the intrusive, incompetent, and sometimes vindictive credit system..

The natural way to grant credit is the Target and Macy's way. They give little tiny $200 cards to almost all comers and then see whether the cardholders can handle them. They raise the limits later based on responsible behavior, and until then charge high (but not extortionate) interest rates..

Citibank sometimes gives better deals to long-time cardholders than their external credit histories from years back could justify. That's because sometimes they see credit as a relationship between you and them, not as something they use to enforce every other creditor's collection problems..

Your credit history is a set of relationships between you and various lenders. To the extent that they violate those relationships by "poisoning the well" for your future relationships, they deserve to be confused and deprived of any further information about your affairs. And to the extent that they abandon those relationships by engaging the predatory services of collection agencies, they abandon any rights to further payments..

Outright lies are wrong because they make you a liar, not because they mislead the drooling sadists at the CRA's and CA's. Anything short of an outright lie is not only allowable but imperative if it makes the system less efficient at slandering you..

There is also another profound moral principle involved in credit repair. That would be that regardless of your past problems, you should devote most of your effort to paying your current debts on time. Then time, if nothing else works, can heal your credit history..

The financial system works best when current debts are paid on time, and old delinquent debts are written off. Trying to collect bad debts is risky at best, and no one else can base their financial plans on money you pay to collection agencies, which is highly uncertain. Or base their financial plans on punitive interest rates on your credit cards, which are risky almost by definition. But they can base their financial plans on your perfect record of recent payments. That's the best thing you can offer to atone for any past mistakes..

You don't need to deal with collection agencies or subprime lenders on their own terms just to pay the price for your past mistakes. That benefits parasites, predators and bottom-feeders, but not the productive segments of society. You can only benefit society as a whole in a positive way if you rejoin the prime credit ranks as soon as possible. Then you can spend your money on real goods and services, not on court costs, accumulated late fees, or 30% interest rates..

The law hardly touches the credit system in some ways, but it has managed to codify and enforce the Old Testament practice of cancelling debts every seven years. That's why you can always outwait your bad credit if nothing else works. We can thank that "divine imperative" for the fact that CRA's usually don't report your mistakes for the rest of your life, even though they would dearly love to do so..

I think that relationships and forgiveness are both great ideas. Please feel free to base all your Lending Tree credit repair decisions on those principles, not on amoral, legalistic sophistry. The law can be a powerful tool, but you need principles to feel good about using it:.

(1) Your private financial relationships are not public information..

(2) Your past financial mistakes are irrelevant, provided you don't repeat them...

Good overall post RichGuy. In addition, I had wondered about Citibank and what you said makes sense..

I just think it bears emphasizing that if someone treats you well then it should be reciprocated. If I had a late from Citi on my report and they wouldn't goodwill it off, I wouldn't go nutcase on them or try to entrap them on FCRA violations merely for the goal of having a clean report. This no holds, kill them before they kill you, anything goes attitude many espouse is dangerous. Although in some cases....

Couple of years ago when my financial "difficulties" started taking a turn for the worse I got a call from MBNA. They had reviewed my credit reports and were "concerned" about my situation and ability to maintain payments. So they cut my limit, raised the min. payment, and jacked my rates. (vent mode - Yeah, if they're SOOOO concerned, why not give someone a break and drop the interest rates rather than driving them into where they can't pay! /vent mode).

Citi on the other hand never did that. I've gotten an auto limit increase within the past year. And, one month this past summer, when things were at their absolute worst, my Citi statement came with a notation that because of my excellent payment history they were lowering my rate. I actually was late once upon a time with them though - the shame. However, it's never been reported to the CRA's unlike the way trigger happy MBNA works. That's why Citi has been at the top of my must pay list along with my Lending Tree mortgage and car payment.



0..

*****1*Is it moral for a creditor or credit reporting agency to wreck your credit or chances of obtaining such for a period of 7 years??.

2*Most criminals who commit very immoral crimes get less jail time then this!.

3*Most state's statute of limitations are well below 7 years..

4*Does it seem moral or make sense that 3 different CRA's and maybe even more get large kickbacks and payments from creditors for reporting your credit and reputation for profit?.

5*Does it seem moral that when you contact a CRA or OC to advise them to follow the law and they continue to go ahead and break it over and over make any sense??.

6*I'll dispute anything that I want which is adversely effecting me, moral or not..

7*If CRA's or OC's do not want to follow the law then they can write me out a very nice check for their immoral ways, as I'll sleep very good at night..

Tac.

================.

1*NO Way.

2*very true.

3*3years is long enough.

4*No especially since much that is reported is myth, half truths out rite lies false hoods & slander. Making matters worse even the positive information is miss interpreted causing false assumptions..

5*Far from it..

6*If you don't you loose..

7* Me 2.*****..

The conversation may be "healthy", but it is, in my opinion, completely inane..

The issue is simple, does a debtor have the same legal rights as anyone else?.

If someone gets a speeding ticket, they have some choices, they can pay the fine OR they can defend themselves in court..

There are MANY MANY people who defend themselves against all sorts of charges EVEN if they know they are guilty..

Do you know that the reason so many INNOCENT peope wind up on death row? It is because the ones who know they are guilty have pleaded out to a lesser sentence..

The question is one of legal justice, under the law, NOT "ethics"...

I will add my 2 cents..

First, unlike most people on this board, I am one of those who thinks there is such a thing as ethics and morals. There is a right and wrong and what's right and wrong doesn't change from person to person depend on their own conclusions or beliefs. And I must admit that I consider disputing items that are legitimately your fault to be wrong. People these days don't want to pay the consequences for their actions and Lending Tree credit repair is a way to get around paying your dues plain and simple. The system is set up so that as long as you change your ways and start behaving better financially, you can have good credit again in anywhere from 3-7 years after your previous bad credit days. And that's the consequenses of our actions..

That being said, I must admit that I have been involved in disputing negative things that were legitimate myself. So in that sense, I've done wrong. But to me it's more a matter of what's better for my family. I can either keep myself in a small house or appartment for 7 years and be charged super high interest rates which just serve to hold us back longer, or I can do something that's wrong and have good credit again in 1-2 years and have a much bigger house, lower interest rates, more money for my family, etc. And so I choose the latter..

Furthermore,.

The system is designed to NOT recognize when someone has made MAJOR changes in their finincial lifestyle.

And I think that's a little unfair. In my case, when I got into my credit problems, I was making $8 an hour at a dead-end job and had to just use credit cards to survive. Nowadays, I own my own company, employ 8 people, and make 10 times that hourly rate. I've made every payment on time for the last 3 years and will continue to do so yet the system still regards me as someone who is a higher credit risk. And I think that's a little unfair and unjustified..

So to me, it's not a quesion of whether it's right or wrong. I think there is a right and wrong - even in business. But it's whether you're willing to do a minor wrong to make it right with another part of your life..

I suppose those with super high character would just let their credit stand and pay their dues. But I hate to see my family suffer because of my mistakes. So I chose not to keep them waiting...

Unreal. First, I don't think you know how most of 5697 members of this board feel about right and wrong, and whether or not they have ethics..

You then say people these days don't want to pay the consequences for their actions but obviously, neither do you. You can justify that you only did Lending Tree credit repair because of your family. But you know what, if you really had these ethics that you say most here don't, you wouldn't have done credit repair, period. That basically makes you a hypocrite and it makes you one of those who you say have no ethics..

But you did at least admit you were wrong in disputing. And please don't take this as a flame, it is a discussion...

Whychat is correct, this subject is inane and has nothing to do with LEGALITY of credit repair,..

I find it funny to read peoples' versions' of ethics and morals AS THEY ARE NEVER THE SAME from person to person. Ethical and moral values are nothing more than culturally influenced OPINIONS generated from one's subconscious and other's views of ethics and morals. And as such they have little to do with what is TRULY right or wrong, as they can easily change from situation to situation..

KINDNESS, COMPASSION, BROTHERLY LOVE..these are things that "transcend" the laws, ethics, and morals, that can and will change from day to day , country to country. These TRUTHS are always helpful, and improve one's own live by improving the life of another...

I agree completely. Sadly, you'll find very few Americans who actually have thought this truth through..

This is very well stated, and imo, the clearest (and, ironically, most honest) defense of lying for Lending Tree credit repair I've read on this board to date. Because of the God I believe in, I do not have the choice to.

Willfully.

"do a minor wrong to make it right with another part of my life". But I wholeheartly agree that right and wrong are morally and philosophically absolute. Thanks for your two cents. They're worth much more than that....

Humblemarc writes:.

And then writes....

Should people take these statements as a TRULY right analysis of ethics and morals, or can we safely assume that these statement reflects humblemarcs's culturally biased sense of opinion on morality and happily ignore them as such and go on our merry ways?.

And before anyone gets offended and wants to reply, please think.

Long.

And.

Hard.

About what I just asked..

This disconnect between a denial of absolute morality which guide ethics in society is what I find completely inane..

In one breath, morals and ethics (which are nothing more than moral absolutes acted out) depend on the person and his/her subconcious and cultural background. In the next breath "kindness, compassion, and brotherly love" are supposed to transcend all morals and ethics and are to be the TRUTHS that (I presume) humblemarc wants all humans to aspire to for a better society..

You can't have your cake and eat it to. Kindness, Compassion, and Brotherly Love.

Do not exist.

Without an unchanging objective moral absolute (and the resulting ethic in a society's law) to tell humanity that it is always, ALWAYS - regardless of culture, subconscious, or opinion - right to be good to other human beings..

As I said, you can't have your cake and eat it, too. Otherwise, you end up having your feet firmly planted in the clouds...

Credit reports are just malicious gossip that's reduced to written form and sold to anyone who wants an excuse to cheat you..

RichGuy.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~.

Congratulations RichGuy:No truer words were ever Spake...

All's fair in love and war and like Butch said this is war...

I believe there is a right and wrong, a moral and ethical issue involved in credit repair, however, I try not to impose my views on others too often,that being said, since everyone else is starting the new year with their own "moral" instructions, I will give you mine..

It is WRONG to pay a collection agency a DIME if you do not absoutely have to.They are a "make work" socially and economically unproductive segment of our capitalistic society,whom I consider to be at the same level as internet spammers and pornographers..

If a person feels obligated to pay someone something -they should donate the $$ to the nearest homeless shelter or soup kitchen..

It is WRONG not to hold credit reporting agencies responsible for errors, even minor ones, on OWED debts..

They are part of the system that chews up middle and low income people and spits them out after reducing their lives to inaccurate data..

The rich and powerful who run the system consider themslves above this so-called "reporting" which is why the Enrons and Worldcoms will continue to get away with their frauds & cheating..

In short, I believe it is.

WRONG.

, it is.

IMMORAL.

, it is.

UNETHICAL.

Not to protest any and all violations by CRA's, CA's and OC's..

In the words of Abraham Lincoln,.

"To sin by silence, when they should protest, makes cowards of men"..

Oh Marci,.

I do enjoy our discussions as they show you actually read what I write. :).

Let me put it differently, if every person TRULY acts and reacts from a standpoint of unselfish love, humility compassion, harmlessness, etc. THERE IS NO NEED FOR ETHICS, MORALS, GOVERNMENT, RULES, LAWS, ETC. Why? because everyone is governed and guided by doing what is best for others and the world/universe as a WHOLE. And while you and many others may thinks this is an impossibility on this world or any other, I know for a fact, there are people and communities where this exists. Where people ARE governed by God, inner spirit, intuition, (whatever your culture, religion chooses to call it) and until one experiences this for themselves, it may difficult to imagine what this is like or how this works..

Nevertheless, I would love to meet with you one day and discuss these things as I feel you have a lot to offer the world...

1*If I have a problem paying Citibank, for example, it's no one's business but Citibank's. It should affect my relationship with Citbank, provided they apply their internal rules fairly and equally. But it should never affect my relationship with anyone else..

Lb*Right on.

2*We conform to the whole credit reporting and.

Credit scoring system because we enjoy the conceit that it's possible to get a $5000 credit card overnight..

It is for some, but we all pay a price to the intrusive, incompetent, and sometimes vindictive credit system..

Lb* This is the Volkswagens I was talking about..

LB 59..

I quibble with your use of the words "morals" and ethics". I'm not quite sure we are defining these words in the same way. So let me restate where I am coming from with these terms, so at least, when we argue heatedly, we can argue on the same plane. :-).

Morals and ethics exist period, simply as a rule of nature, be they good or bad. Decartes said "I think, therefore I am." I'm saying "Because I am, I think rightly (or wrongly)". In other words, morality (and the resulting ethical acts) is an intertwined, inexorable part of human existence..

Therefore, I would reword your above quote to say that "if every person truly acts and reacts from a standpoint of unselfish love, humility, compassion, harmlessness, etc.

Which are all acts of ethics guided by moral absolutes.

, there is no need for rules or laws..

And with that rewording, I agree with you. :-).

In utopia, yes. Utopia does not exist (but you knew that I would write this). Your reasoning sounds much like that of Immanuel Kant, who thought that reasonable people would reasonably guide themselves to a reasonable, ethically pure existence with each other, simply because it was best for society as a whole. History has, unfortunately, called him a liar..

Why? (insert marci's opinion) Because perfect morality and ethical behavior cannot originate in humans. And, I'll stop here before Saar comes along to chatise me on use of divine imperative....

Thank you. That is (truly) kind of you and I am honored. Likewise, re what you have to offer to the world as well...

Lol.

I'll just wait til Saar pops in and tells us to stop...

;-).

Kant.. hmm.. haven't read him in a while, but I remember his theories well...

Yes, at this point in time, utopia does not exist on a large scale basis due to selfishness, which I argue is the cause of ALL the world's ills.. however, I will personally testify, in a court of law, if need be, that there are small communities where utopias do exist. Where people have worked long and hard to become unselfish, loving, and harmless, and starve out their selfishness. I have seen and been to a few of these places, but that is a topic for another board...

I'm only trying to get an ACCURATE representation of my CURRENT risk..

Radi8.

==================.

Pretty hard to do this when they live in the past..

LB 59..

1*Well, if you don't think it is, then you can't pretend that the whole CRA system is moral and that it's immoral to interfere with it. Credit reports are just malicious gossip that's reduced to written form and sold to anyone who wants an excuse to cheat you..

2*The law hardly touches the credit system in some ways, but it has managed to codify and enforce the Old Testament practice of canceling debts every seven years..

=====================.

RichGuy.

1*The whole deal is the so called system is nothing more than licensed racketeering..

2*Citing another bible principal were are to be good stewards of what has been provided to us..

Is letting the alleged system cheat you being a good steward????.

LB 59..

I don't. You're right. But from what I've read over the years, It's not too difficult to tell that most people (at least most people posting) don't really have any moral or ethical problem with disputing items they know are legitimate. So I am making a decerned educated guess. And I think it's fairly accurate..

I agree. It does make me a hypocrite. And I try not to be a hypocrite very often and practice what I preach. But as I said above, in this case I was willing to compromise my ethics a little in order to better my family..

And I also think we're all hypocrites to one degree. None of us are perfect, and yet we keep doing wrong things. I'd challenge anyone here to disagree. But I'd much rather be a hypocrite and have a reason for it than to be one who says there's no such thing as right and wrong and just continues to make up their own version of what's right and wrong so they can do what "feels good". I do realize the difference between right and wrong. And when I do something that's wrong, at least I admit it's wrong.

But I feel sad for those who think that right and wrong are up to each individual person. That's far from true..

I could care less even if it was a flame. Doesn't bother me in the least. I know I am outgunned when it comes to my beliefs on this topic. I just wanted to share them. If someone disagrees, so be it...

By the way, everyone's a hypocrite at times. That can be good or bad. It's good if you're trying to improve yourself. Anyone who holds ideals that haven't been achieved yet is in a sense a hypocrite...

BTW - I don't blame you at all for doing what you did. I have done the same and I am not one bit ashamed of it...

No, and here's why:.

Who is harmed-nobody..

Who benefits? everybody..

Credit reporting and FICO cause a temporary financial problem to balloon into a 7-year crisis..

If I have to pay more on my Lending Tree mortgage and car payment, I have less disposable income to spend..

That reduced spending affects everybody-from job cuts to reductions in charitible donation..

Cleaning up my credit reports has no effect on owing the original debt.( if one even exists) Either I'm going to pay it, or I'm not..

The result of a better credit report, is less fixed expense and more money to spend-.

The other possible result, if everybody cleaned up their credit, is the demise of predatory lenders..

No more auto title loans, payday loans, cross country bank, 23% rates..

Where is the harm in credit repair? Who is damaged?.

If there are ethics involved, then I feel good that I am able to spend more, donate more, and help speed the demise of the predatory lenders that prey on those who can least afford it..

If anyone should stay awake at night with moral misgivings, it is those who try to economically enslave us for their personal ond corporate profit..

Radi8..

And enslave us UNDER FALSE PRETENSES by offering us credit and then "repricing" it when we use it...

I am a regular reader (not lurker...that sounds too creepy) of this board, but hardly ever post. I just wanted to say how much I love this subject, as it is one that I have thought about very often. Even though I agree completely with everything marci has posted, it is interesting hearing all of your thoughts. By the way, as long as I am actually posting something-I actually found myself laughing out loud at the turtle-killing post-almost woke up my family!..

Hi kpucha, regular reader NOT a lurker, LOL ;-).

I agree, lurker reads so sinister..

I'm glad you came out to your keyboard, very nice to meet you!.

Sassy..

SHHHHhhh!!!.

Marc took it pretty hard! :).

-welcome!.

Radi8..

OK. my .02 worth....

Was it ethical for my company to lay me off w/o warning? Gee, if I left, they would want 2 weeks notice!.

Was it ethical of my ex to violate our marriage vows and then make the divorce a living & financial hell?.

How is it ethical for ME to be held in some credit prison for the actions of others????!!!!.

Criminals get out of real prison faster than CRAs drop derrogatory tradelines!.

Was it ethical for there to be a "settled for less than full balance" on my credit report when the "settlement" was: bal $350, hey we will settle this for $150. Then credit your bal with the $250 in your savings portion of this secured card?!?!?!? That $250 was MY money. They got ALL their money. But they won't take that line off my bureau!.

Was it ethical for the insurance company to deny the claim that was valid, leaving me with a collection account?.

If the tradeline has even 1 error in it and it cannot be verified, it HAS to be deleted! That is the law and that makes it ethical..

Is it ethical to just sit back and get raped on interest rates and turning my hard earned money over to a bank when I should be able to spend that money on my kids?.

For the past 2 years I have been paying $1395/mo for rent for my house. With my income I should own this darn thing! AND Lending Tree mortgage payments would be less than I am paying in rent!!!! I am using the LAW to clear up my credit to get a mortgage. There is nothing unethial about it..

:-)..

I don't see any ethical problems with disputing a credit report..

In our country, even a criminal accused of the most heinous crime is given the opportunity to plead "not guilty".

While we view the crime as a serious ethical breech, the pleading of not guilty is rarely considered an unethical act. In fact, the common view is that state has the ethical duty to prove that a defendant is guilty, while the defendent has no duty to prove his innocence..

When it comes to credit reports, disputing a negative item is simply pleading "not guilty" to that item..

It is then up the CRA and/or lender to prove that you are indeed guilty of that credit infraction. If the cra or lender cannot prove that you did such and such, it is imo unethical for them to report it as such..

There are many things in life that are unethical. Asking a CRA to prove itself hardly rises to an ethical question in my mind...

I'll go one better - is it ethical to be turned down from 3 different residential rental agencies even though your report had zero rental delinquencies???.

Simply stated, they lock you in credit prison, and throw away the key REGARDLESS of how/why you got in that situation..........PLEASE DO NOT PLAY THE ETHICS GAME WITH ME, ITS COMPLETE BS - sorry just venting!!!!.

-Sal..

Did you all know that the average person.

Breaks the law 7 times day?.

Obvioulsy usually without knowing it..

We should all execute ourselves..

Lol..