[ZX3URrBH]

It is a great example of how companies are allowed too much power. They don't have to actually prove that you did something wrong, they can go after your credit regardless if you are at fault. A Credit Agency can hurt your credit rating with no evidence of cause to do so.

In a January 3rd New York Times op-ed, columnists Michael Lewis and David Einhorn rail against the rating agencies:

"End the official status of the rating agencies. Given their performance it’s hard to believe credit rating agencies are still around. There’s no question that the world is worse off for the existence of companies like Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s. There should be a rule against issuers paying for ratings. Either investors should pay for them privately or, if public ratings are deemed essential, they should be publicly provided."

"Financial blogger Paul Kedrosky takes it one step further and suggests that rather than restructuring these entities, we should do away with them altogether. Mr. Kedrosky correctly points out that there is no regulatory oversight for equities, which begs the question: Why don’t we just let the private investors rate these securities, like they do with equities? Sure, private investors don’t always value equities perfectly, but obviously rating agencies don’t either."

http://seekingalpha.com/article/1135...ating-agencies

[carfAball]

cuz its racist?
who says that? black folk?
i seen the the vid posted on fb, but didnt click on it. i should have.

[prmnwoks]

Credit reporting agencies are in fact a rigged system and a joke.

[DariushPetresku]

cuz its racist?
who says that? black folk?
i seen the the vid posted on fb, but didnt click on it. i should have.

Read my post please, I has nothing to do with racism, it has to do with accountability.


Credit reporting agencies are in fact a rigged system and a joke.
I agree, it's amazing such a thing is allowed to exist in this country.

[fgjhfgjh]

Read my post please, I has nothing to do with racism, it has to do with accountability.



I agree, it's amazing such a thing is allowed to exist in this country.

A creditor can post anything they want to your credit. You can challenge it, and it will remain. You can contest it, and they are supposed to post your statement, but when people pull your credit, they wont see that you contested it or why. So if you dispute a bill with a creditor, and don't pay it, because you believe you don't owe it, then they can ruin your credit, and there's nothing you can do about it, unless you want to spend thousands going to court.

[Ingeborga]

A creditor can post anything they want to your credit. You can challenge it, and it will remain. You can contest it, and they are supposed to post your statement, but when people pull your credit, they wont see that you contested it or why. So if you dispute a bill with a creditor, and don't pay it, because you believe you don't owe it, then they can ruin your credit, and there's nothing you can do about it, unless you want to spend thousands going to court.

So companies can hold your credit hostage.

[tigoCeree]

So companies can hold your credit hostage.

No, they hold it hostage while you use their services. Should you have a dispute with them, they simply wage economic war so you'll just pay whatever they want to avoid ruining your credit.
The IRS is another great example. If you owe more than $25k, they will file a federal tax lien on you. I know of people who filed their return, and paid their tax only to find out their identity had been stolen, and the IRS thought they owed in excess of $25k and they had a federal tax lien slapped on them. It stays there until they can prove their stolen identity case, which usually takes a year. In that year, their credit is hosed, they can't buy shit, and the insurance rates go through the roof. Better yet, the government doesn't have to prove they notified you of the lien, they can file it without your knowledge, or your ability to contest it. Just like an angry company, usually a utility company.

[BrandandGeneric]

[QUOTE=markendsley;30986]It is a great example of how companies are allowed too much power. They don't have to actually prove that you did something wrong, they can go after your credit regardless if you are at fault. A Credit Agency can hurt your credit rating with no evidence of cause to do so.

Ever heard of a law suit?

In a January 3rd New York Times op-ed, columnists Michael Lewis and David Einhorn rail against the rating agencies:

Someone will always be railing against something.


"End the official status of the rating agencies. Given their performance it’s hard to believe credit rating agencies are still around. There’s no question that the world is worse off for the existence of companies like Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s. There should be a rule against issuers paying for ratings. Either investors should pay for them privately or, if public ratings are deemed essential, they should be publicly provided."

What laws are they breaking? If none, shut up.

"Financial blogger Paul Kedrosky takes it one step further and suggests that rather than restructuring these entities, we should do away with them altogether.

Sounds like a Jew to me.

Mr. Kedrosky correctly points out that there is no regulatory oversight for equities, which begs the question:

Ever thought about people overseeing their own affairs?


Why don’t we just let the private investors rate these securities, like they do with equities? Sure, private investors don’t always value equities perfectly, but obviously rating agencies don’t either."

So what's your point?

[aaafluochugh]

A creditor can post anything they want to your credit. You can challenge it, and it will remain. You can contest it, and they are supposed to post your statement, but when people pull your credit, they wont see that you contested it or why. So if you dispute a bill with a creditor, and don't pay it, because you believe you don't owe it, then they can ruin your credit, and there's nothing you can do about it, unless you want to spend thousands going to court.

Sue 'em!!!

[Seasmillets]

Sue 'em!!!

If it's egregious enough yes, but in most cases it's not practical to sue them. There should be another practical mechanism in place to work these things out.

[marcusdexz]

If it's egregious enough yes, but in most cases it's not practical to sue them. There should be another practical mechanism in place to work these things out.

Why isn't it practical to sue them?

[yasalaioqe]

Why isn't it practical to sue them?

One would be the government. If the government has placed a lien against you, and it was a mistake, you have no recourse other than to get them to remove it, which never happens quickly.
Second, if it's a utility or bill that you're disputing and the amount is $200 (just an example), having to go to the expense of filing a lawsuit isn't practical for the average person, it's simply to expensive. If it's large enough of an issue, then yes, a lawsuit might happen. Also, most people find these inaccuracies when they're applying for credit. The time needed to fix the issue usually negates the lending process, while you waste a lot of time trying to straighten out the mess.
Personally, I only think debt contractual instruments should show up, ie loans, credit cards ect.. not disputed bills, likewise, they should just take you to court. However, if they win a judgment, then maybe that should go on your credit.

[KLIMOV25gyi]

One would be the government. If the government has placed a lien against you, and it was a mistake, you have no recourse other than to get them to remove it, which never happens quickly.
Second, if it's a utility or bill that you're disputing and the amount is $200 (just an example), having to go to the expense of filing a lawsuit isn't practical for the average person, it's simply to expensive. If it's large enough of an issue, then yes, a lawsuit might happen. Also, most people find these inaccuracies when they're applying for credit. The time needed to fix the issue usually negates the lending process, while you waste a lot of time trying to straighten out the mess.
Personally, I only think debt contractual instruments should show up, ie loans, credit cards ect.. not disputed bills, likewise, they should just take you to court. However, if they win a judgment, then maybe that should go on your credit.

Use an attorney good enough to demand enough to cover any and all losses you may incur due to the error. Few people realize it, but if someone damages your property or reputation, they can be forced to pay damages that cover all contingencies of loss by plaintiff.

[ViagraFeller]

Use an attorney good enough to demand enough to cover any and all losses you may incur due to the error. Few people realize it, but if someone damages your property or reputation, they can be forced to pay damages that cover all contingencies of loss by plaintiff.

Sure, but you have to win first, until then, you foot the entire bill. While court usually offers a way to settle disputes, it's possibly the most expensive, and least productive way to solve dispustes. Court is not the optimal way to solve most problems, and most business people view court as a faliure to work things out reasonably.

Also, joe American will more than likely not be able to afford the representation that it woud require.

[HonjUopu]

Sure, but you have to win first, until then, you foot the entire bill. While court usually offers a way to settle disputes, it's possibly the most expensive, and least productive way to solve dispustes. Court is not the optimal way to solve most problems, and most business people view court as a faliure to work things out reasonably.

Also, joe American will more than likely not be able to afford the representation that it woud require.

If you don't have a good enough case, you shouldn't be suing in the first place.

[Almolfuncomma]

If you don't have a good enough case, you shouldn't be suing in the first place.

Even if you have a good case, you can't sue if you don't have the money. So as long as you can't afford a lawyer, a credit agency can do to you whatever they want.

[chuecalovers]

Even if you have a good case, you can't sue if you don't have the money. So as long as you can't afford a lawyer, a credit agency can do to you whatever they want.

If you can't afford a lawyer, you shouldn't be frequenting loan sharks.

[PlanTaleks]

You don't have to be frequenting loan sharks to have this problem, often times illegal immigrants stealing ones identity and ruining it are nearly impossible to reverse.