Yep, but... you might wanna make sure and wait for another commenter to confirm it as I am on the fence. Better yet, why don't you email the Lending Tree guys because they can assist you better...

The FCRA does not IMHO distinguish between hards and softs. Only full reports and promotional type pulls that only release limited information. Thats why I suggested goodwilling them to recode it...

I can't get a person with a pulse and half a brain there to even try it. I've spoke with several people and faxed my letter to 3 different people. I've asked for a reply back via phone, fax or email. So far nothing. I was thinking maybe the threat of a lawsuit would awaken SOMEONE who would be willing to take the 30 seconds needed to change or delete the inquiry...

LOL, that might get the right person's attention, but IMHO you may not have a legal leg to stand on if they refuse. Have you tried Planet Feedback?.

You have got to get to the right person, past the CSR's and at least one or two supervisors up...

I'm currently "on hold" with them as I am typing this. I called and asked for their legal department. They gave me their executive offices. I told the secretary I was going to file a lawsuit and wanted the phone fax number. She put me on hold and came back and told me she had someone from the dispute department (whom I was told earlier couldn't receive calls) who would rectify this immediately for me. When I spoke with Teresa, she said "I only work on credit cards and personal lines of credit.

When I dialed it I got the SAME recorded message about Lending Tree mortgage Inquiry. I've had it with them!..

I have never had anything good come from wells fargo....finally pulled everything out from them, and moved on. good luck..let us know how it goes..

I think they do:.

(3) Information regarding inquiries. Except as provided in section 609(a)(5) [ 1681g], a consumer reporting agency shall not furnish to any person a record of inquiries in connection with a credit or insurance transaction that is not initiated by a consumer..

I think a CRRR letter to the legal depstment is in order...

If I am not mistaken, there is an FTC opnion letter in refards to this.

Http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fcra/gowen.htm.

It very clearly states that closed-ended accounts are not subject to account reviews and thereby no permissible purpose exists. They could not alter any of the terms of the Lending Tree mortgage after it was signed therefore they have no permissible purpose. A lawsuit may be in order...

You should read the forum at this link. Christine has A LOT of experience with Wells Fargo and you may be very happy to read the following....

Http://www.creditforum.org/showthrea...=&threadid=229.

I'd be willing to bet that you would win your $1,000.

Good Luck!..

WOW! I copied the verbage out of Christine's letter and put it on a separate letter and sent all of it to the faxes listed on Christine's letter. I had 3 different fax numbers. I'm psyched! Just think, all I really wanted early was deletion of the inquiry. I wouldn't push it this far put they REALLY pissed me off with their so-what attitude. If they had said "we're sorry, we made a mistake" and deleted it right away, I probably would have been satisfied...

This FTC opinion letter (Gowen) implies that your current Lending Tree mortgage lender CANNOT pull an AR after the closing because they cannot alter the Lending Tree mortgage terms and therefore have no PP for the AR..

Well, I just noticed on my TU report that my current Lending Tree mortgage lender has been regularly pulling ARs every 4 months (6 total since April 2001). Did they really not have a permissible purpose for these ARs?..

Boywonder may be right. I would push it myself. Just be prepared for the OC to counter with the only effective argument he has which may cause him to win his case..

I would push the issue though. I doubt these people are slick enough to profer this defense. :)..

Also, you should check legal opinions in your U.S. Circuit courts. The 8th appelate circuit has cited the Gowen FTC opinion letter in affirming decisions. If you live in the eighth circuit, your claim for violations are pretty airtight..

For the sake of argument, what possible motive would a closed-end creditor have for pulling inquiries? The terms and the provisions of the deal are already set in stone. What hypothetical purpose could said creditor have for reviewing ones credit report?.

I think Golf67 has an easy $4k coming his way. Notethere are also criminal penalties for non-permissible purpose pulls of a credit report. Has anyone used this in negotiating settlements?..

If they had a right to run it before you closed, then why would it be 4 violations?..

DOH! You're right, LKH. I was misreading the dates for the first inquiries. Golf67Let's call that last post a mulliganmake that $2k...

Boywonder,.

Your post was 20 minutes after mine, so I assume you saw it before you posted..

As the Footnote for the Gowen Opinion states:.

The OC, even on a Contractual Installment Agreement, may pull a report..

The purpose of which is to determine the "safety and soundness" of their anticipated ROI. (return on investment)..

If you were getting ready to default they'd wanna know well ahead of time. It has a lot to do with measuring [anticipated] profits and setting future dividends for Stock Holders..

However, like I said, I really don't think these guy's even know this, so yeah, I'd pursue the case to see what happens..

And if I ever had to send the Gowen opinion I'd cut off the footnotes. lol.

Play their game for once..

:)..

BTW - these footnotes guy's are often added well after the publication of the opinion..

It clears up confusions created by the opinions themselves..

Sometimes an opinion says one thing so later they add a footnote saying: "weeell ... that's not quite exactly what we meant"..

Always read those too..

As far as Golf is concerned, just pursue your case and pretend I didn't point this out..

:)..

Can you expand on this and point us to the applicable criminal codes? I would think that introducing the possibility of criminal penalties would really improve your leverage in negotiating a favorable settlement...

I received a letter from Wells Fargo in the mail. It states:.

I received your correspondence addressed to Wells Fargo Home Lending Tree mortgage requesting a credit correction to your account..

You may initiate the credit review process by requesting a consumer investigation form from any of the credit repositories. Consumer disputes are submitted to Wells Fargo Home Lending Tree mortgage electronically by the credit agencies. We respond to these agencies within a five-business day period..

They then give me the 3 credit bureau address/phone numbers..

What a load of crap! When I spoke to Experian and Equifax (CSC) on the phone, they said to dispute inquiries I needed to send a letter to the party that inquired disputing the inquiry..

In reference to an earlier post about why it is $4,000 instead of $2,000 (because they had permission to run it the first time) is because they ran it on me AND my DH. 2 violations for each of us..

What should my next step be?..

Ok, here's my thoughts. You need to bs them.

Dear Wells Fartgo:.

CRA's consider inquiries a statement of fact and will not investigate. Per the FCRA they have strict compliance guidelines to wit:.

(3)(A) Identification of each person (including each end-user identified under section 607(e)(1) [ 1681e]) that procured a consumer report.

(i) for employment purposes, during the 2-year period preceding the date on which the request is made; or.

(ii) for any other purpose, during the 1-year period preceding the date on which the request is made..

Therefore, I'm giving you the option. 1. Delete those inquiries or pay me $1,000 per inquiry, for my spouse and I, or I will be forced to sue you..

(Ok this is rough - just some thoughts on how to handle the problem)...

I would have been happy with a deletion a few weeks ago. But after the attitude from Wells Fargo, I want them to pay..

Guess what I got in the mail today besides the letter fromWells Fargo? I got a letter from TU telling me that my inquiries are a record of fact and will remain on my credit report for two years blah blah blah. It says "If you believe that an inquiry on your credit report was made without a permissible purpose, then you may wish to contact the creditor directly..

OMG! This is what I did! Wells Fargo sent a letter (received same day as TU) telling me to dispute it with the CRA! And they wonder why we are pulling our hair and screaming! What an irony!..

This is what you posted in the beginning:.

The June 20 inq's were permissible purpose for the mortgage. That leaves the inq's from August 27 as without permissible purpose. 2 inq's, 1 for each of you = at most, 2 violations...

I must not have posted what I was thinking. It is 2 violations each because on 8/27/02 they pulled on both uf us from 2 different CRAs. That would be 4 violations, correct?..

Ah, big difference there, LOL. I now see why you said 4, however, I don't think you can count the same violation each time as a separate violation. I think you may be stuck with one each. The big key to any lawsuit is whether or not you can show actual damages..

616. Civil liability for willful noncompliance [15 U.S.C. 1681n].

(a) In general. Any person who willfully fails to comply with any requirement imposed under this title with respect to any consumer is liable to that consumer in an amount equal to the sum of.

(1)(A) any actual damages sustained by the consumer as a result of the failure or damages of not less than $100 and not more than $1,000; or.

(B) in the case of liability of a natural person for obtaining a consumer report under false pretenses or knowingly without a permissible purpose, actual damages sustained by the consumer as a result of the failure or $1,000, whichever is greater;.

(2) such amount of punitive damages as the court may allow; and.

(3) in the case of any successful action to enforce any liability under this section, the costs of the action together with reasonable attorney's fees as determined by the court...

As the above indicates, a No PP inq. is a FLAT statutory fine of $1,000, no more, no less..

Damages are not necessary in this case..

Go for all 4, but be prepared for the judge to "go easy" on them and levy $1,000 only..

Therefore, push for all 4 and settle outta court for 1..

:)..

Gotcha. I'll fax them over a letter today. I have been reading Christine's posts from creditboards.com regarding wells fargo. She actually received $1000 from them. I'll base my letter on her second letter to them. I'll tell them I want $2000 for me and $2000 for DH and see where we go from them...

Really? When and what for? Do you have copies of the correspondence?..

Direct Merchants..

Called me to market their CC. I was promised no pull but they did it anyway..

$1,000 paid within 20 days..

And of course I do..

About 30% down on:.

Http://consumers.creditnet.com/strai...t=astonishment.

In blue..

:)..

Actual damages are not necessary, but, as the statute reads:.

That is what precipitated my comment about damages being important..

So, if there were actual damages, it would be possible to be awarded more than $1,000...

I faxed off my letter yesterday to Wells Fargo. I pointed out their ignorance on disputing. They told me to dispute an inquiry to go to the CRA and gave me their addresses. I forwarded TU letter to me telling me to dispute an inquiry to send a letter to the creditor disputing it..

Here is my letter to them:.

March 5, 2003.

Wells Fargo Legal Department.

Attn: Alyce Nall, Written Research Department.

I am writing in reference to your letter dated Feb. 28, 2003 to myself and my husband. This letter was sent via US Mail, even though I provided you with a fax number to expedite things. Please correspond via fax number xxdxd-xxx-xxxx in the future..

You are incorrect in stating that to dispute an inquiry I need to go through the CRA directly and dispute. I spoke with Equifax and Experian and they both told me to send you a letter directly. I also am enclosing a letter I received from Trans Union telling me to dispute directly with you. I guess you need to brush up on the applicable laws and procedures..

Once again, I am informing you that you are in willful violation of the FCRA by running my credit report on August 27, 2002 from 2 CRAs and running my husband’s on August 27, 2002 from 2 CRAs..

I am referring you to.

Http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fcra/gowen.htm..

This is an FTC opinion letter in regards to closed-ended accounts. They are not subject to account reviews because you can not alter any of the terms of the Lending Tree mortgage after it is signed. Therefore you did NOT have permissible purpose to run our credit and are in willful violation..

This is subject to $1,000.00 per violation. You have committed two violations against me and two violations against my husband. We will either settle this with you outside of court before March 12, 2003 for $4,000.00 plus deletion of the inquiries from our credit reports or we will win this settlement in court, plus damages. We are purchasing another home and our credit scores have suffered because of the unlawful inquiry. We are entitled to damages on top of this. For grounds please see:.

FCRA 616. Civil liability for willful noncompliance [15 U.S.C. 1681n] "(b) Civil liability for knowing noncompliance. Any person who obtains a consumer report from a consumer reporting agency under false pretenses or knowingly without a permissible purpose shall be liable to the consumer reporting agency for actual damages sustained by the consumer reporting agency or $1,000, whichever is greater." Please also see:.

1998 FTC opinion letter Greenblatt at.

Http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fcra/greenblt.htm:.

"Any person who procures a consumer report under false pretenses, or knowingly without a permissible purpose, is liable for $1000 or actual damages (whichever is greater) to both the consumer and to the consumer reporting agency from which the report is procured.".

We can and will subpoena all Wells Fargo employees to Lewistown, Illinois, who had anything to do with this and any employee that discussed this with us. This includes yourself and the erroneous letter that you mailed to us dated February 28, 2003. I believe that you should call the CRA agencies yourself and get educated on how inquiry disputes are handled..

Please fax a response to the number indicated above...

Um, have you already sent this? What you quoted from the FCRA is the penalty to the CRA, it says nothing about the penalty to the consumer...

Yes, I already sent it. I was letting them know they could end up paying me AND the CRA. It mentions damages to me here:.

1998 FTC opinion letter Greenblatt at.

Http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fcra/greenblt.htm:.

"Any person who procures a consumer report under false pretenses, or knowingly without a permissible purpose, is liable for $1000 or actual damages (whichever is greater) to both the consumer and to the consumer reporting agency from which the report is procured.".

If they give me trouble, I could let the CRAs onto this, and they could fine them also..

This is correct, isn't it?..

Ok, whats done is done, but from what I understand, if this goes too far, staff opinion letters do not necessarily hold the weight of law. Here is what you needed to quote them:.

(B) in the case of liability of a natural person for obtaining a consumer report under false pretenses or knowingly without a permissible purpose, actual damages sustained by the consumer as a result of the failure or $1,000, whichever is greater;.

The FCRA doesn't define a "natural person", and I think only uses that term one other time in the Act. I used the Greenblatt letter to back that clause up, because he omitted the word natural..

I'm sure everything will work out, maybe at least the letter you sent will get their attention, if I recall that has been your biggest problem!.

Good luck!..