<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Wrongful Credit Damage, Identity Theft and Debt Collection Abuse Blog</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com</link>
	<description>by Brennan, Wiener &#38; Associates, La Crescenta, Ca.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Jul 2010 04:50:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>IMPORTANT Information on Credit Scoring&#8211;the Bureaus Compile the Scores and, in most cases, THEY ARE BASED ON INCOMPLETE OR INACCURATE INFORMATION!</title>
		<link>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/07/26/important-information-on-credit-scoring-the-bureaus-compile-the-scores-and-in-most-cases-they-are-based-on-incomplete-or-inaccurate-information/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/07/26/important-information-on-credit-scoring-the-bureaus-compile-the-scores-and-in-most-cases-they-are-based-on-incomplete-or-inaccurate-information/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jul 2010 16:09:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>baddogbob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Credit Damage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Credit Report Damage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Credit Score Damage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FICO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fair Isaac]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wrongful Credit Damage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wrongful Credit Report Damage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[credit score]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FICO score]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FICO score damage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[los angeles consumer lawyer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/07/26/important-information-on-credit-scoring-the-bureaus-compile-the-scores-and-in-most-cases-they-are-based-on-incomplete-or-inaccurate-information/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hello Readers,
Welcome to the &#8220;Dog Days,&#8221; so named because the &#8220;Dog Star&#8221; is high in the nighttime sky and very visible.  My grandmother used to tell me that &#8220;Dog Days&#8221; were so named because dogs went blind with the heat of the late summer, but, upon further inquiry, I regret to report that my [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello Readers,</p>
<p>Welcome to the &#8220;Dog Days,&#8221; so named because the &#8220;Dog Star&#8221; is high in the nighttime sky and very visible.  My grandmother used to tell me that &#8220;Dog Days&#8221; were so named because dogs went blind with the heat of the late summer, but, upon further inquiry, I regret to report that my dear grandmother was misinformed.</p>
<p>On the subject of &#8220;misinformed,&#8221; you need to know that <a href="http://socalcreditdamage.com">credit scoring</a> is actually performed by the bureaus, using &#8220;algorithms&#8221; supplied by Fair Isaac.  For those of us who did not major in mathematics, traditionally an &#8220;algorithm&#8221; referred to a set process or function through which you could put a number to obtain a result.  A very simple algorithm might be &#8220;3x,&#8221; and then you would supply the specific number.  So, if you supplied the number &#8220;4&#8243;, then the algorithm would give a product of 12.</p>
<p>Obviously, when calculating something by a highly complex computer system, the algorithms become more and more complex.  </p>
<p>The essential point that you need to understand, however, is that the &#8220;algorithms&#8221; are the functions or processes through which your <a href="http://socalcreditdamage.com">personal credit information</a> is put to create a credit score.  However, it is not nearly as scientific as most people believe.  Below is a short article reprinted from the New York Times which identify, correctly, the credit bureaus as the ones who create the score, using algorithms licensed from Fair Isaac Co.  This really is a classic example of &#8220;garbage in, garbage out,&#8221; because if the bureaus do not include positive accounts (which happens all the time) or if they include false or inaccurate negative accounts, your credit score takes a big hit.</p>
<p>Enjoy the article and enjoy the &#8220;Dog Days&#8221;.  Here it is.</p>
<p>It is not FICO that comes up with a borrower’s score — it just sells the algorithms. The companies that do are the big three credit bureaus, TransUnion, Equifax and Experian. They gather input about the prospective borrower’s lending history from various lenders like credit card companies and auto dealers, plug them into a formula and derive a credit score.<br />
You would think, given the critical importance of an accurate score, that there would be rules about the information that is submitted to them. There aren’t. Lenders can submit information about your credit history to one of the bureaus, all of them or none of them. Some of them turn over information right away; some take months; some don’t do it at all. Some are sticklers for accuracy; others are sloppy. The point is that the credit score is derived after an information-gathering process that is anything but rigorous.<br />
And finally, they don’t take into account the many, many mistakes that are found in credit reports. My own credit reports, which I looked up for this column, are a case in point. Although my score was O.K. — the low 700s — the reports themselves were full of unpleasant surprises. They listed credit card accounts I didn’t have, and failed to list at least one big one that I did have. Two of them noted that five years ago, I was late on a car payment. (I was?) My daughter’s old Brooklyn address was listed as my former address. According to Experian, I was still writing for Fortune magazine. It said I no longer lived in a house that I just bought two months ago. TransUnion, meanwhile, listed The New York Times as my former employer. Currently, TransUnion said, I am an employee of Rite Aid.<br />
Rite Aid? I know, I know — it is supposed to be up to me to catch their mistakes (which is also why they don’t have to care about the mistakes.) But what I find incredible is that we have imbued credit scores with these magical predictive powers — and yet the companies coming up with the scores can’t even get the borrower’s address and employer right. It would be funny if it didn’t matter so much.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/07/26/important-information-on-credit-scoring-the-bureaus-compile-the-scores-and-in-most-cases-they-are-based-on-incomplete-or-inaccurate-information/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Role of The Debt Validation Letter</title>
		<link>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/07/21/the-role-of-the-debt-validation-letter/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/07/21/the-role-of-the-debt-validation-letter/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Jul 2010 18:05:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>baddogbob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Credit Damage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/?p=274</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><center><object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/V98hKSdKvxU&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/V98hKSdKvxU&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/07/21/the-role-of-the-debt-validation-letter/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>California&#8217;s Debt Collection Abuse Statute Protects Consumers</title>
		<link>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/06/30/californias-debt-collection-abuse-statute-protects-consumers/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/06/30/californias-debt-collection-abuse-statute-protects-consumers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Jun 2010 18:44:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>baddogbob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Credit Damage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/?p=272</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><center><object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/UzX9BNXgYfc&#038;hl=en_US&#038;fs=1&#038;"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/UzX9BNXgYfc&#038;hl=en_US&#038;fs=1&#038;" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/06/30/californias-debt-collection-abuse-statute-protects-consumers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>BEWARE of debt collectors who promise to clean up your credit</title>
		<link>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/06/14/beware-of-debt-collectors-who-promise-to-clean-up-your-credit/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/06/14/beware-of-debt-collectors-who-promise-to-clean-up-your-credit/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:32:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>baddogbob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Credit Damage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/?p=270</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><center><object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/snwDhdJGKTQ&#038;hl=en_US&#038;fs=1&#038;"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/snwDhdJGKTQ&#038;hl=en_US&#038;fs=1&#038;" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/06/14/beware-of-debt-collectors-who-promise-to-clean-up-your-credit/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Account Number Morphing – Still Another Barrier to Accurate Credit Reporting</title>
		<link>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/06/03/account-number-morphing-%e2%80%93-still-another-barrier-to-accurate-credit-reporting/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/06/03/account-number-morphing-%e2%80%93-still-another-barrier-to-accurate-credit-reporting/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Jun 2010 18:04:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>baddogbob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Credit Damage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[california credit damage attorney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[los angeles consumer lawyer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/?p=268</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Account Number Morphing – Still Another Barrier to Accurate Credit Reporting
By Robert F. Brennan
       The Federal Credit Reporting Act [“FCRA”] makes it mandatory for Credit Reporting Agencies such as Experian, Equifax and Trans Union “to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information in the [consumer’s [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Account Number Morphing – Still Another Barrier to Accurate Credit Reporting<br />
By Robert F. Brennan</p>
<p>       <a href="http://socalcreditdamage.com">The Federal Credit Reporting Act</a> [“FCRA”] makes it mandatory for Credit Reporting Agencies such as Experian, Equifax and Trans Union “to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information in the [consumer’s credit] report….” A willful and negligent failure to do so is violation number 1 of the <a href="http://socalcreditdamage.com">FCRA</a>. One wonders then when in fact it turns out that certain Credit Reporting Agency [“CRA”] procedures, or lack thereof, assure maximum possible inaccuracy of information in the consumer’s credit report. Are we to take it that the words of a federal law mean exactly the opposite of what they say? Legally, philosophically, morally, one would think not.</p>
<p>	A “trade line” on your credit report provides certain standard items of information about an account you have, such as the name of the company (say a department store, for example), the company’s address, the account number, the current balance on the account, the terms of the credit, and so forth. Any of this information could in fact turn out to be incorrect, but the item on information we will address in this article is that definite and critical identifier for the CRAs, the account number.</p>
<p>	One would think that such a mundane piece of information as an account number couldn’t possible cause that much trouble, and in a sense that is true. What actually causes the problem is when the account number for the same account gets changed, and sometimes morphed repeatedly, so that the identity of the actual account is greatly obscured. When this is allowed to happen, the CRAs’ super computers, employing simple logic but lacking intelligence, assume that an account is the same, or a match, when it has the same account number, and that it is different when it does not. Therein can lie the source of much headache, aggravation and damages for a consumer, and much denial of responsibility from the CRAs.</p>
<p>	An example would be helpful here to illustrate. Let us say the Consumer A is receiving bills for a $600.00 balance on a department store credit card. Consumer A never applied for such a card and therefore the debt cannot be his. He suspects someone stole his identity and opened the account using his social security number and other private information. After numerous phone calls and letters back and forth, the department store agrees that it is not Consumer A’s debt after all and tells Consumer A not to worry about it, that they’ll “take care of it”. Naturally, Consumer A is now relieved and assumes it will ve “taken care of”, i.e., they will stop billing him for the invalid debt and it will be deleted from his credit report. The account number, by the way – let us say it is 1234567890 and that is the way the CRAs are reporting it on Consumer A’s credit reports. Consumer A notifies the CRAs by certified mail of the situation, along with documentation, and they all delete the previously reported trade line within a month.</p>
<p>	About four months ago by and Consumer A is dismayed to receive in the mail a letter from a Debt Collection Company named “Pit Bull”. Pit Bull, in its letter, states that it is collecting a debt on behalf of the department store (the same on that earlier told Consumer A not to worry about it, that they would take care of it and delete it from his credit report.) Pit Bull shows the debt now as $850.00, having tacked on a $50.00 penalty and a $200.00 “default charge” or attorney’s fees), but informs Consumer A that, although he owes immediately the full amount of $850.00, they will take $450.00 as a full payment. They can’t guarantee Consumer A that the department store will reinstate him in good graces vis-à-vis his credit card (the one that was never his in the first pace) but if he pays them the $450.00 at least they will stop dunning him. The account number of the letter is now 123DEPTSTRE890. A few months later Pit Bull furnishes the account 1234567890 as 123DEPTSTRE890 to the CRAs, showing the account as a “charge off”, amount $850.00, and a note that the trade line will be reported for the next seven years!</p>
<p>	Consumer A is now distraught. He calls the department store and reiterates his story that the department store had earlier investigated, agreed with him that he did not owe the debt and that “they would take care of it” for him. These words come back to haunt Consumer A as the representative now tells him that they are sorry, the account is now with collections, and that they cannot interfere as it is now out of their hands. Consumer A also tried to clarify the satiation with Put Bull but, other than being cursed at and told to “pay the damn bill”, he gets nowhere. He disputes with the CRAs with certified letters, giving a full account of the situation and a statement that he categorically does not, and never did, owe the debt. Two of the three CRAs shortly thereafter delete the trade line from Consumer A’s report, but one of them does not. That one informs our consumer that they checked with the furnisher (Pit Bull) and the furnisher “verified” with them that the information they provided on the debt was valid.</p>
<p>	Some more months pass and Consumer A starts feeling frantic. He tries to get refinancing on his home but is told he’ll have to clear up the derogatory trade line showing on one of his credit reports as a first step. He is also denied credit on a couple occasions which he suspects resulted from the same derogatory reporting.</p>
<p>	Consumer A starts religiously checking his credit report, and discovers that now the account is being furnished by another collection company, Viper Inc., and the account number has changed again, this time to “732******”. Our consumer becomes by this point very discouraged. He tried communication with Viper In., but they are just as nasty and, if anything, more venomous than Pit Bull.</p>
<p>	At this point Consumer A finds an attorney firm that will take his case and initiate a lawsuit on his behalf. Among other things, the Complaint accuses the remaining CRA of a “reinsertion violation”. What the CRA had done in this example was “willfully and negligently violated the reinsertion requirements of 15 U.S.C. Section 1681i(a)(5)(B) in reinserting derogatory information into plaintiff’s credit report after he had previously disputed it, without certification or notice.” (Even though the account number kept changing, it was still the same account being referred to all along. The CRA in question deleted, the reinserted the same account without notifying Consumer A, a no-no.)</p>
<p>	After the account is deleted and then reinserted, the CRA fails to notify Consumer A within 5 business days that they are re-inserting the account information. The ironic twist to all this is that the CRA then argues that the “reinsertion” of the account was not their fault because it had a different account number, and how are they supposed to know that it was the same account?</p>
<p>	How, indeed! It was the CRA’s own regulations, or lack thereof, that allowed the reinsertion to occur. The CRA argues that if they had known it was the same account then they wouldn’t have reinserted it, and yet the CRA is the one who allowed Pit Bull, and Viper Inc., and whichever entities came afterwards, to keep changing the account number on the same account; in short, in effectively disguising it from the CRA’s computer which only matches identities, not similarities or differences.</p>
<p>	It is bad enough that the CRAs frequently take the word of disreputable or highly questionable collection entities over that of disputing consumers; but it is unconscionable that the CRAs allow collection entities to in effect cloak the identity of accounts even from themselves, the CRAs, and then blame it on the same system that they helped create! This bungling would be laughable if it didn’t happen to cause consumers so much financial hardship, as well as frustration and emotional pain.</p>
<p>Robert F. Brennan</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/06/03/account-number-morphing-%e2%80%93-still-another-barrier-to-accurate-credit-reporting/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The California Identity Theft Law</title>
		<link>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/05/26/the-california-identity-theft-law/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/05/26/the-california-identity-theft-law/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 May 2010 19:03:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>baddogbob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Credit Damage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/?p=264</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><center><object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/QK4ky2CImbg&#038;hl=en_US&#038;fs=1&#038;"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/QK4ky2CImbg&#038;hl=en_US&#038;fs=1&#038;" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/05/26/the-california-identity-theft-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>IMPORTANT! How to Dispute With The Credit Bureaus</title>
		<link>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/04/19/important-how-to-dispute-with-the-credit-bureaus/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/04/19/important-how-to-dispute-with-the-credit-bureaus/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Apr 2010 01:17:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>baddogbob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Credit Damage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/?p=262</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><center><object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/n2CcXcGNKSU&#038;hl=en_US&#038;fs=1&#038;"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/n2CcXcGNKSU&#038;hl=en_US&#038;fs=1&#038;" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/04/19/important-how-to-dispute-with-the-credit-bureaus/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Short Sales and Credit Reporting</title>
		<link>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/03/30/short-sales-and-credit-reporting/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/03/30/short-sales-and-credit-reporting/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Mar 2010 19:16:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>baddogbob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Credit Damage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/?p=260</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><center><object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/8S76buobtG4&#038;hl=en_US&#038;fs=1&#038;"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/8S76buobtG4&#038;hl=en_US&#038;fs=1&#038;" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/03/30/short-sales-and-credit-reporting/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>LifeLock&#8211;What a Crock!</title>
		<link>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/03/09/lifelock-what-a-crock/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/03/09/lifelock-what-a-crock/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 20:25:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>baddogbob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Credit Damage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Credit Report Damage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Credit Score Damage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FICO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fair Isaac]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Identity Theft]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Identity thieves]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LifeLock fraud]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wrongful Credit Damage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wrongful Credit Report Damage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Credit Report Protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Identity Theft Protection]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[LifeLock]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/?p=258</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hello Readers,
We get a lot of inquiries about LifeLock and other similar services, wherein you pay the company a monthly fee to protect your credit report.  Guess what?  You could do this all yourself if you followed the advice on my website or on the Federal Trade Commission website, www.ftc.gov.  For the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello Readers,</p>
<p>We get a lot of inquiries about LifeLock and other similar services, wherein you pay the company a monthly fee to protect your credit report.  Guess what?  You could do this all yourself if you followed the advice on my website or on the Federal Trade Commission website, www.ftc.gov.  For the most part, LifeLock simply places security alerts or security freezes for you, which is something you can and should do yourself anyway.  It is not a service you need to purchase.  It is the financial equivalent of paying a lot of money to have someone put gas in your car when you can do it yourself for less.</p>
<p>Evidently the Federal Trade Commission and several states Attorneys General agree with me.  Today LifeLock (What a Crock!) paid out $12 million to settle fraudulent advertising claims.  Here&#8217;s the story.</p>
<p>LifeLock Will Pay $12 Million to Settle Charges by the FTC and 35 States That Identity Theft Prevention and Data Security Claims Were False<br />
LifeLock, Inc. has agreed to pay $11 million to the Federal Trade Commission and $1 million to a group of 35 state attorneys general to settle charges that the company used false claims to promote its identity theft protection services, which it widely advertised by displaying the CEO’s Social Security number on the side of a truck.<br />
In one of the largest FTC-state coordinated settlements on record, LifeLock and its principals will be barred from making deceptive claims and required to take more stringent measures to safeguard the personal information they collect from customers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/03/09/lifelock-what-a-crock/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>New Credit Card Law: A &#8220;Trojan Horse&#8221; of Consumer Protection?</title>
		<link>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/02/22/new-credit-card-law-a-trojan-horse-of-consumer-protection/</link>
		<comments>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/02/22/new-credit-card-law-a-trojan-horse-of-consumer-protection/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 20:05:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>baddogbob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Credit Damage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Credit Report Damage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Credit Score Damage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Debt Collection Scams]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Debt collection abuse]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FICO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wrongful Credit Damage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wrongful Credit Report Damage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consumer credit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[credit card]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[credit reporting fraud]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[new credit card law]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/?p=256</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hello Readers,
Most of you remember the tale of the Trojan Horse, where the Greek Army gave a gift to the embattled city of Troy of a great wooden horse in which were hidden 30 of the best Greek troops.  The rest of the Greek Army pretended to sail away, only to return in the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello Readers,</p>
<p>Most of you remember the tale of the Trojan Horse, where the Greek Army gave a gift to the embattled city of Troy of a great wooden horse in which were hidden 30 of the best Greek troops.  The rest of the Greek Army pretended to sail away, only to return in the evening when the secreted Greek soldiers emerged from the horse to open the gates to the city.  The upshot of the tale is that sometimes supposed gifts can contain some very unpleasant, and even destructive, surprises.</p>
<p>And so it is with the new credit card law.  The bank lobby fought for time to &#8220;prepare for its passage,&#8221; and has spent that time figuring out all manner of devilry to avoid it and make consumer credit even more disastrous than it was before the law was passed.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s a current article from The Associated Press which I found has given some good insights on the effects of the new law.  Hope this is helpful to you.  Thanks for reading.</p>
<p>NEW YORK (AP) &#8212; Your next credit card statement is going to contain an ugly truth: how much that card really costs to use.</p>
<p>Now, thanks to a long-awaited law that goes into effect Monday, you&#8217;ll know that if you pay the minimum on a $3,000 balance with a 14 percent interest rate, it could take you 10 years to pay off.</p>
<p>&#8220;Jaws will drop,&#8221; said David Robertson, publisher of The Nilson Report, a newsletter that tracks the industry. &#8220;I don&#8217;t doubt for a nanosecond that it&#8217;s going to give a lot of people a sinking feeling in their stomachs.&#8221;</p>
<p>That&#8217;s not all that will make them queasy.</p>
<p>During the past nine months, credit card companies jacked up interest rates, created new fees and cut credit lines. They also closed down millions of accounts. So a law hailed as the most sweeping piece of consumer legislation in decades has helped make it more difficult for millions of Americans to get credit, and made that credit more expensive.</p>
<p>It wasn&#8217;t supposed to be this way. The law that President Barack Obama signed last May shields card users from sudden interest rate hikes, excessive fees and other gimmicks that card companies have used to drive up profits. Consumers will save at least $10 billion a year from curbs on interest rate increases alone, according to the Pew Charitable Trust, which tracks credit card issues.</p>
<p>But there was a catch. Card companies had nine months to prepare while certain rules were clarified by the Federal Reserve. They used that time to take actions that ended up hurting the same customers who were supposed to be helped.</p>
<p>Consumer advocates say the law still offers important protections for the users of some 1.4 billion credit cards.</p>
<p>&#8220;We expected some rate increases; we expected some annual fees,&#8221; said Ed Mierzwinski of the U.S. Public Interest Research Group, an advocacy organization that lobbied for the law.</p>
<p>To be sure, the law takes effect while credit card companies are still reeling from the recession.</p>
<p>In 2007, the top 12 card issuers earned a combined $19 billion from credit cards, according to The Nilson Report. A year later, amid the financial meltdown, profits for those companies fell more than 65 percent to $6.32 billion. The plunge was largely because defaults ballooned as unemployment soared.</p>
<p>Profit figures for 2009 aren&#8217;t yet available. But banks wrote off about $35 billion in credit card debt last year, as the unemployment rate topped 10 percent. Analysts predict the default rate will remain at least twice as high as normal through this year, and longer if unemployment stays high.</p>
<p>At the same time, the law is expected to cut into future profits. FICO Inc., the company best known for its credit scores, projects the average card will generate less than $100 a month in revenue within three years, down from $200 a month before the law.</p>
<p>That helps explain why the industry reacted so aggressively to the legislation. Among the moves it made:</p>
<p>&#8211; Resurrected annual fees.</p>
<p>Annual fees, common until about 10 years ago, have made a comeback. During the final three months of last year, 43 percent of new offers for credit cards contained annual fees, versus 25 percent in the same period a year earlier, according to Mintel International, which tracks marketing data. Several banks also added these fees to existing accounts. One example: Many Citigroup customers will start paying a $60 annual fee on April 1.</p>
<p>&#8211; Created new fees and raised old ones.</p>
<p>These include a $1 processing fee for paper statements for cards issued by stores such as Victoria&#8217;s Secret and Ann Taylor. Another example is a $19 inactivity fee Fifth Third Bank now charges customers who haven&#8217;t used their card for six months.</p>
<p>Other banks increased existing fees. JPMorgan Chase, for instance raised the cost of balance transfers from one card to another to 5 percent of the transfer from 3 percent.</p>
<p>&#8211; Raised interest rates.</p>
<p>The average rate offered for a new card climbed to 13.6 percent last week, from 10.7 percent during the same week a year ago &#8212; meaning cardholders had to pay almost 30 percent more in interest, according to Bankrate.com.</p>
<p>For millions of other accounts, variable interest rates that can rise with the market replaced fixed rates. The Fed is expected to start raising its benchmark interest rates later this year, which would likely trigger an increase on those cards.</p>
<p>Besides making credit more expensive, banks also made it harder to get and keep credit cards. One big reason: Since the financial meltdown, many credit card issuers have been trying to reduce risk.</p>
<p>The number of Visa, MasterCard and American Express cards in circulation dropped 15 percent in 2009, for example. Rarely used cards were among the first cut off. Some cards linked to rewards programs for purchases like gasoline were likewise shut down.</p>
<p>Card companies also slashed credit limits for millions of accounts that remain open. About 40 percent of banks cut credit lines on existing accounts, according to the consultant TowerGroup, which estimated that such moves eliminated about $1 trillion in available credit. Much of that was unused.</p>
<p>Credit lines were frequently cut in regions most affected by the housing crisis and high unemployment, such as Florida and California, said Curt Beaudouin, a senior analyst at Moody&#8217;s Investors Service. &#8220;They&#8217;re not doing it willy nilly, they&#8217;re doing it systematically,&#8221; he said.</p>
<p>Companies are also making fewer solicitations. Mailed offers for new cards increased in the final three months of 2009 for the first time in two years, but there were only about 575 million. That&#8217;s about a third of the average number of quarterly offers from 2000 through 2008, according to Mintel.</p>
<p>Because the law makes credit cards less profitable, some subprime borrowers may not be able to get cards at all, at least for the next few years. There&#8217;s no fixed definition, but subprime borrowers generally have a FICO score below 660. For a good portion of this group, options may be limited to alternatives like PayPal and other electronic payment services, prepaid cards and payday lenders.</p>
<p>&#8220;Not everyone either deserves or should have an open-ended credit card,&#8221; said Roger C. Hochschild, chief operating officer of Discover Financial Services.</p>
<p>Joining those who won&#8217;t easily get cards: college students and others under age 21. The law strictly limits card marketing on campuses, ending giveaways like T-shirts and pizza Cards can only be granted to applicants who show they have the means to repay, or those who have a co-signer who can pay.</p>
<p>&#8220;Some of the more vulnerable parts of the population are a little bit more protected,&#8221; said Georgetown University finance professor James Angel. But he predicts card companies will find ways around most of the new restrictions. And once the economy recovers, he expects the lending spigot to open again.</p>
<p>In the meantime, there is one group of consumers that banks will chase after &#8212; those who carry a balance from month to month for at least part of the year, and pay their bills on time. They&#8217;re the most profitable and least risky group for banks.</p>
<p>Also a target customer: anyone willing to do more business with the bank that issues their card, say opening a checking or savings account or taking out a mortgage.</p>
<p>&#8220;What we want is a deeper relationship with our customers,&#8221; said Andy Rowe, an executive vice president with Bank of America&#8217;s card business. Customers willing to stick with a single bank may even be able to get annual fees waived or get a better interest rate, he said. &#8220;That&#8217;s where the competition will be.&#8221;</p>
<p>Copyright © 2010 The Associated Press. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.socalcreditdamage.com/2010/02/22/new-credit-card-law-a-trojan-horse-of-consumer-protection/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
