Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

CREDIT REPAIR THRU USE OF LIBEL LAWS

Expand Messages
  • law_self_help
    Credit grantors(banks, department stores,credit card and mortgage companies) are in business to make money; they are unlikely to be interested in fighting
    Message 1 of 2 , Mar 3, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Credit grantors(banks, department stores,credit card and
      mortgage companies) are in business to make money; they
      are unlikely to be interested in fighting someone in the
      courts and incurring significant legal expenses, possibly
      having to pay a judgement while not standing to gain any-
      thing - all this just to defend an entry in the credit
      file. Therefore if one
      has some grounds to argue that there are
      questionable entries in one's
      credit file it is helpful to discuss the matter with the
      credit grantor(s)/bureau so as to drive it home that they are
      inviting a lawsuit and then if that was not fruitful
      to send certified letter to the credit grantor and/or
      credit bureau about such inaccuracies and that in
      one's opinion that amounts to libel. In practice a winnable
      Libel case has to prove that the credit history entry is
      incorrect, that it was entered purposely and that it caused
      damage/harm to the plaintiff. It also has to be filed within a year
      of a discovery of such libelous claims. Since some credit grantors
      purposely make their credit entries as damaging as possible
      to make the debtor pay what they claim as due, in many
      cases the makings of a winnable case are already there.
      The prospect of litigation would usually provide incentive
      to the credit grantor/bureau to remove or correct the said
      entries from one's credit history record. If however they
      are not cooperative, then if one can demonstrate that such
      evidently inaccurate credit history items caused one
      material harm, such as credit application denied, higher
      premium charged for auto and other kinds of insurance or
      even employment denied; if so one may well have the grounds
      for a libel lawsuit. If not all said conditions are true
      one may still sue to get the court order to have such
      entries corrected/removed.
      Specialized site for such lawsuits for Pro Se Plaintiffs
      with lots of links and
      examples of pleadings
      http://www.proselitigant.net/
      Unless the damage done by the
      incorrect entries is substantial, most such cases would be
      resolved thru the Small Claims Court. Even a Small
      Claims hearing will usually require a lawyer and a supervisor
      from the credit grantor to be present in sometimes distant
      court. The Defendant(s) is facing a significant expense and
      has a compelling reason to settle as lawyers say "amicably".
      Link - Definition of Libel in Texas Code, chapter 73 found
      thru megalaw.com. Note that a person from legal standpoint
      can be a natural person or an artificial person: corporation
      or other organisation.
      http://www.megalaw.com/tx/txcodelinks.php?page=
      links&CQ_SESSION_KEY=WOAQKFROUNGQ&CQ_QUERY_HANDLE=
      126023&CQ_CUR_DOCUMENT=11&CQ_TLO_DOC_TEXT=YES

      Moderator/Bear: Copy and paste this link into your browser or it most likely will not work. DO NO write to the group to tell anyone...even me...that this link does not work. You might write this emails author off group if you feel you must. If the link does not work, simply run a Google search using the information you have to locate the page. Thanks.
    • Jaime
      Nice to run across you here. :-) I am brand new to this group. Just prior to joining this group, I had read the web site you mentioned as well as
      Message 2 of 2 , Mar 7, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        Nice to run across you here. :-) I am brand new to this group. Just
        prior to joining this group, I had read the web site you mentioned as
        well as information at www.bayhouse.com, which has inspired me to
        publish my own odyssey through trying to get inaccuracies removed from
        my own and my husband's credit reports. We just mailed the first
        round of CMRRR letters yesterday. Over the course of the next month
        or so I will try to publish and post links to letters, responses and
        keep updates of successes and failures, as well if we are required to
        proceed to litigation on any of it. I'll only post the links when/if
        this information becomes substantial, in case it might be helpful to
        someone.

        The reason I joined the group was to hope to glean information about
        two sticky situations relative to credit reports.

        My husband has student loans in his name that he never applied for.
        He thinks it might have been a result of theft of personal information
        from the VA, but we don't know for sure. The most recent student loan
        was opened last January for $10,000. We found a form on the Direct
        Studen Loan website called Unauthorized Signature/Unauthorized
        Payment Discharge application, which we submitted. Most of the blanks
        were filled in "unknown". They returned it in 10 days and said the
        "information was not complete". They stated that they had highlighted
        the incomplete portions for us to complete and for him to sign the
        form again and return it. Funny thing is, nothing on the form was
        highlighted. So he signed it again, sent them a letter to that effect
        when he returned it. I can already tell we are going to be in for
        some fun. Immediately after that they sent us an "application for
        forbearance". Signing this would be an admission that he was the
        borrower, which he wasn't.

        I know for a fact that he was not in school this year and certainly
        didn't have an extra $10k kicking around.

        For my part, my credit report is showing a tax lien from the State of
        California FTB for $3k+ for the 2003 tax year. I moved to Texas in
        May, 2002. I filed a part year NR tax return in CA that year. This
        item was effective on my credit report 04/2006.

        On my very first paycheck for January, 2003 my employer inadvertantly
        entered California in the computer and about $155 in state tax was
        deducted from that paycheck. This error was corrected the following
        pay period, and I paid no more income tax to the state of California
        for that year. Maybe I coulda shoulda woulda filed a CA tax return to
        reclaim that $155 as a non-resident, but I didn't. I don't know why I
        didn't, I just didn't.

        I don't know if that would have made a difference or not OR if that is
        what I should do now to get them to remove that item from my credit
        report. But California is claiming I owe for the entire year based on
        my total earnings + penalties and interest and whatever else...

        I had actualy forgotten about the $155 when I wrote to tell them that
        I had moved to Texas in May, 2002 and owe California nothing (after I
        found the tax lien on my credit reports). They responded with my
        earnings statement for 2003 another tax bill. I haven't written them
        back yet. I'm still trying to figure out if I can make them just go
        away if I file that 2003 return. Thanks to Hurricane Rita I don't
        have a lot of my records for that year.

        Anyway, I have read through some of the posts and am looking forward
        to participating in this group. I enjoy doing legal research when I
        have time and hope to be of some assistance sometimes, too.







        --- In tips_and_tricks@yahoogroups.com, "law_self_help"
        <law_self_help@...> wrote:
        >

        > Specialized site for such lawsuits for Pro Se Plaintiffs
        > with lots of links and
        > examples of pleadings
        > http://www.proselitigant.net/
        > Unless the damage done by the
        > incorrect entries is substantial, most such cases would be
        > resolved thru the Small Claims Court.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.