• 123 4 59
  • Page
  • Text Only
This is direct from the thread I posted here yesterday:
"There is a very plausible theory on what is happening over at CB. If you pull your TU report via the backdoor they are reporting that all soft inquiries from TU products are being chopped. This opens up room for your hard inquiries to reappear. This is why some of us are not seeing any hard inquiries reappearing (using non TU products), some reporting only a few reappearing (using TU products and non TU products) and some reporting all reappearing (using only TU products)."
I think it helps explain what is going on.

I must admit I only have a high school education (Been so long ago I am not sure it was high school) and English was not my best subject. My question is when you say someone posted incorrect information I did not know you were calling them a liar. Me bad, that was more of a statement than a question. See I was not kidding that English was not my best subject.

Rorer714 said: I must admit I only have a high school education (Been so long ago I am not sure it was high school) and English was not my best subject. My question is when you say someone posted incorrect information I did not know you were calling them a liar. Me bad, that was more of a statement than a question. See I was not kidding that English was not my best subject.

Rorer714 said: We should do a little research before we post incorrect information (not you tuff).

When you quote my post and put that at the end of your post that sure is a passive aggressive way of calling me a lair. You said the same thing after I linked the thread where and told you pages where I stated that info was given. So I am just repeating what was said and you insist on being passive aggressive about it and continue to call me a lair.

There are many ways to tell someone they are wrong, there info they read was wrong etc in a nice or civil way but when you decide to be nasty do not be shocked when you a reaction.

P.S. My english is far from prefect as I am not even american and only went to school in this country for 2 years.

onlyemokid said: I had used only myprivacymatters.com since around dec 07, and had bumped 4 off. As of 2 days ago, all 4 have come back. That's the only site I used to pull on, once daily.

Thanks for the info... I think it would be very worthwhile to know from all who have had reinsertions, if you haven't already posted it, which credit monitoring services have you used for the past year, and if you can get the info, how many soft inquiries you had before and after the reinsertions, and which softs were chopped.

From reading here and at CB (and I've only gotten to page 44 so far in that thread), the pattern seems to me that many people (including myself) who have used CK, CS, CCT or CIDP have not had any reinsertions, and many people who have used TC, PM123, MPM, NCIP, or CIDP (before it changed to First Advantage) have had the reinsertions. People who have used services from both groups may or may not have reinsertions, presumably depending on how many pulls came from which group.


ETA - I see now that Rorer posted pretty much the same thing above.

tuffghost said: From reading here and at CB (and I've only gotten to page 44 so far in that thread), the pattern seems to me that many people (including myself) who have used either CK or CCT or CIDP have not had any reinsertions, and many people who have used TC, PM123, MPM, or CIDP (before it changed to First Advantage) have had the reinsertions. People who have used services from both groups may or may not have reinsertions, presumably depending on how many pulls came from which group.
I am almost afraid to respond to your post. The last time I did someone went off the deep end. Here are two data points:
CS, CK & CIDP (not TU based), 0 came back as of today
CK & NCIP, 1 came back as of yesterday (from 4/11)

I have used TrueCredit every day since my AOR in November. As of today, all 9 inquiries that hit my account are back. It dropped my score 26 points.

Rorer714 said: WalStMonky said: My last name starts with B and I think none of my inquires I bumped

Wow, dolmar bumps. Hey dolmar, I thought you thought it highly unethical to game the system in order to make the issuers think your less of a risk. Perhaps you just bump for kicks and giggles? There's a word running through my brain and it starts with the letter h, ends with e, and has 9 letters...
LOL!!! Am I close?
H _ _ _ C _ _ _ E

If someone could draw a picture of a hangmen this could be fun!
H _ _ _ C R _ _ E
WSM am I getting hotter or colder?

Since TU is rarely pulled in my area other than for Juniper I didn't have a lot of inquiries other than for a nearly two year old car loan when the dealer stuck me with 6 TU pulls. I don't even have a TU inquiry left that FICO would score.
I pulled TC from last April through last October. I pulled Privacy 123 from that point through this May. CIDP from last December to the present. As of early this morning I haven't seen any inquiries come back but I fully expect to see them all within a few weeks.

Glitch99 said:
I've had ~55 CK pulls since those inquiries. So allowing for some soft pulls from creditors over the past 8 months, it seem that bumpage may still be working as always - requiring the estimated 60-70 pulls to fill up your file - but now excludes TU/TC-based services. My remaining 5 inquiries that had been re-added *should* drop off again after another week of CK updates, if this is in fact true.


to confirm: I was using TC ans CS to b* 3 months. Lately I am pulling CS (EX based)only. 2 days ago 2 inqs on TU were back, 1 of them is gone today. Also, I used CS only fo my GF, and none of TU inqs is back

Transunionassociate,

I wonder if you are able to hold your head high, being an employee of a company responsible for credit reporting, that has made such a blunder?

The way in which the software problems were permitted to perpetuate and then the way in which they were handled, corrected and PR'd is a reflection of the management of the company you so boldly claim to be an employee of here publically. I would be embarrassed if I were you.

Are you an example of an employee "gone wild"?

ES

Are you guys saying your recently b* items that have disappeared only re-appeared on TU or all 3 credit reporting agencies? Because I had 0 0 4 and now I have: 4 4 4

I had 8 old INQs show back up when I pulled on TrueCredit this morning. That gives me 10 showing. Awesome.

From 0 -> 18 inq's overnight. 723 -> 678. Can't wait to ride this one out...

djspray said: From 0 -> 18 inq's overnight. 723 -> 678. Can't wait to ride this one out...

18?! Dear lord man, I hope you have something to show for all of those.

PorStaker said: djspray said: From 0 -> 18 inq's overnight. 723 -> 678. Can't wait to ride this one out...

18?! Dear lord man, I hope you have something to show for all of those.

I can't beleive 18 inquiries only dropped the score by 45. 2 points an inquiry.

PorStaker said: djspray said: From 0 -> 18 inq's overnight. 723 -> 678. Can't wait to ride this one out...

18?! Dear lord man, I hope you have something to show for all of those.

Two years of AOR's, and a few CLI's. Should lose ~10 by November. Planning mostly TU inq's used to be the best way to go, lol. Now to figure out what creditors do account reviews using TU...

djspray said:
Two years of AOR's, and a few CLI's. Should lose ~10 by November. Planning mostly TU inq's used to be the best way to go, lol. Now to figure out what creditors do account reviews using TU...


That would be a nice resource to make a comprehensive list of which cards/issuers pull from which CRA and whether they are consistent with pulling from only one agency. One could base an AOR to target or exempt pulls from one or more of the agencies. Anyone want to start a thread or is there one already that I may have missed?

There is, it's called the CreditBoards CRA Pull Database.

Glitch99 said: Glitch99 said: 6 inquiries were restored today, all from my A0R last October (I got 7 TU inquiries from that, so one was not restored - only one of two inq dated 10/6 came back, in addition to inquiries dated 10/8, 10/10, 10/10, 10/13, and 10/16).Today I updated CreditKarma, and my score went up 4 points. So I pulled PM123, and the other 10/6 inquiry (the one that had reappeared yesturday) is now gone. Since one inquiry was readded while another from the same day was not, logic would dictate that the file was still 'filled', and then one additional soft pull subsequently bumped the one that had been readded.

I've had ~55 CK pulls since those inquiries. So allowing for some soft pulls from creditors over the past 8 months, it seem that bumpage may still be working as always - requiring the estimated 60-70 pulls to fill up your file - but now excludes TU/TC-based services. My remaining 5 inquiries that had been re-added *should* drop off again after another week of CK updates, if this is in fact true.


I am with you on that reasoning, and can confirm that the following services are still reported as a unique entry / line per inquiry: credit karma, chase id protection via credco, AMEX credit secure. i am still seing several entries for "TRANSUNION INTERACTIVE I", and "FirstName LastName via TRANSUNION INTERACTIVE I" (in fact, often two per month).

Also, I checked several credit reports (mine and family members). None of my inquiries have come back so far (had b* inquiries that range from 4mo old to 1.5 years old), although according to the true TU report, the "change" has been implemented. Family member A's inquiries came back (total of 2 about 6 mo old). Family member B's inquiries did not come back. Family member C never had any bumped inquiries.

I guess the patchwork fix helps brings inquiries back if B* was mostly done using TU-based services. The more the B* was done using non-TU services, the less likely that your inqs come back. And lastly, if you pull regularly using non-TU based services going forward, you are very likely to see B*. Until, of course, TU fixes that hole too. For now, B* lives on

So, just for fun, let's dissect TU associate's claims:


TU Associate said: TextAll -

I am an employee of TransUnion Interactive, which powers websites that include TrueCredit, Privacy Matters 123 and others.


Ok, quite possibly you are TU employee (or contractor - not sure what to make of the word, Associate). Also, youare quite possible someone who was not (officially) authorized to post such a message on internet forums speaking on behalf of TU.

TU Associate said: TextAll -
As a heads up, TransUnion is in the process of altering its electronic systems to eliminate the "bumping" of hard inquiries that should be reported on credit reports under FCRA guidelines.


Ok, as an entry statement to the rest of your message, not bad.

TU Associate said: TextAll -
Within the next week, all appropriate hard inquiries that have been inadvertently bumped off of any report pulled through one of TransUnion's websites within the last two years will be placed back on the credit report.


Ok, so whether intentionally or not, you gave away your "solution".

TU Associate said: TextAll -
Upon implementation, it will no longer be possible to "bump" hard inquiries.


Unfortunately for TU, this may not be true as of yet.

BTW, any of the old-time, trusted fatwallet members willing to post a response to the TUA in a new thread?

Are you kidding me? They do not have the Balls to do so...

tolamapS said: BTW, any of the old-time, trusted fatwallet members willing to post a response to the TUA in a new thread?

jdmetz said: alchemize said: I wonder if TU is opening itself up to some legal repercussions.

Maybe from lenders who would not have given people with 20 inqs (which they can see now but couldn't earlier) a credit line. I don't see how any consumer would have a successful case against them.


1. Going back to my earlier thread (which was met with skepticism and dismissal) hypothesizing that inquiries do not disappear for good as a result of b*, I feel "vindicated" (but by no means happy).
2. I had only May'08 inquiry come back, Feb'08 and Feb'07 inqs are still gone. Feb'07 inqs were bumped off with PM123 (after being initially b* off with TC and then reappearing), Feb'08 inq -- combination of CK & PM123
3. TU is opening itself for all sorts of legal repercussions, both from lenders and borrowers for knowingly (heck, the inqs WERE in their system) providing FALSE/inaccurate information on its credit reports.

djspray said: PorStaker said: djspray said: From 0 -> 18 inq's overnight. 723 -> 678. Can't wait to ride this one out...

18?! Dear lord man, I hope you have something to show for all of those.

Two years of AOR's, and a few CLI's. Should lose ~10 by November. Planning mostly TU inq's used to be the best way to go, lol. Now to figure out what creditors do account reviews using TU...


Citi pulled EX on my application for credit but pulls TU for AR. The only one I see who does AR other than that is Juniper. I doubt you want to go in that direction.

Glitch99 said: Glitch99 said: 6 inquiries were restored today, all from my A0R last October (I got 7 TU inquiries from that, so one was not restored - only one of two inq dated 10/6 came back, in addition to inquiries dated 10/8, 10/10, 10/10, 10/13, and 10/16).Today I updated CreditKarma, and my score went up 4 points. So I pulled PM123, and the other 10/6 inquiry (the one that had reappeared yesturday) is now gone. Since one inquiry was readded while another from the same day was not, logic would dictate that the file was still 'filled', and then one additional soft pull subsequently bumped the one that had been readded.

I've had ~55 CK pulls since those inquiries. So allowing for some soft pulls from creditors over the past 8 months, it seem that bumpage may still be working as always - requiring the estimated 60-70 pulls to fill up your file - but now excludes TU/TC-based services. My remaining 5 inquiries that had been re-added *should* drop off again after another week of CK updates, if this is in fact true.
After two more CK pulls, another PM123 update shows 2 less inquiries. 3 inquiries remain, and in three more days they should be gone again.

tolamapS said: BTW, any of the old-time, trusted fatwallet members willing to post a response to the TUA in a new thread?

Im game.

But I dont really understand all the doubting/anger etc towards OP. OP wasnt posting on behalf of the company, he was giving a heads up to us in an unofficial capacity.

FWIW we should ENCOURAGE emoloyees and those in the know to leak us inside info. Dont chastise them and drive them away. Some of FW's greatest posters were those inside FI's who shared their insight

djspray said: PorStaker said: djspray said: From 0 -> 18 inq's overnight. 723 -> 678. Can't wait to ride this one out...

18?! Dear lord man, I hope you have something to show for all of those.

Two years of AOR's, and a few CLI's. Should lose ~10 by November. Planning mostly TU inq's used to be the best way to go, lol. Now to figure out what creditors do account reviews using TU...


Go to creditboards.com forums and at the top navigation there is a thing called "Credit Pulls" Which will tell you what creditors have pulled from which files. I just froze my experian report today and plan on doing a TU EQ AOR around December January. This database they have compiled looks like something Fatwallet should have, only more extensive, bigger card names (most people on CB have problems and only apply the offers they think they can get, not necessarily the good ones i would think), and something that is a whole excel sheet of the database, not just searchable but like a full listing on one page broken up by credit bureaus.

SUCKISSTAPLES said: tolamapS said: BTW, any of the old-time, trusted fatwallet members willing to post a response to the TUA in a new thread?

Im game.

But I dont really understand all the doubting/anger etc towards OP. OP wasnt posting on behalf of the company, he was giving a heads up to us in an unofficial capacity.

FWIW we should ENCOURAGE emoloyees and those in the know to leak us inside info. Dont chastise them and drive them away. Some of FW's greatest posters were those inside FI's who shared their insight


I am not sure what he was even getting at when he created this post, and then to have the next guy say "they don't have the balls" is ridiculous. Senior members know better than to attack someone giving a useful heads-up on what is going on inside the companies we use to make our money. On top of that, we also know that it is stupid to start a new thread addressing something an old thread is already covering, that is what people do get chastised for.

SUCKISSTAPLES said: FWIW we should ENCOURAGE emoloyees and those in the know to leak us inside info. Dont chastise them and drive them away. Some of FW's greatest posters were those inside FI's who shared their insightTrue, but unfortunately alot of these 'insiders' turn out to be trolls posting pure fiction. This time it turned out to be good info, but alot of times the validity of such info isnt so readily apparent (and even if it is, its not until after it becomes public knowledge anyways).

Hi...this is Bill...yeah Bill Gates...

I am going to buy Yahoo....yeah the deal went though secretly....but it will not be announced until the closing of the market on Monday...


ES

My 2 inq's for last year on 8-17-07 just came back. I just looked at an old credit report and I had an additional TU inq that is now over 2 years old which didn't show back up.

I wish I had the money back wasted on bumpage.

Had one TU inq re-appear on Thursday, bumped today when I refreshed with NCID. No sign of the 10 other TU inqs that were bumped with TC / NCID / CS.

dmlavigne1 said: My 2 inq's for last year on 8-17-07 just came back. I just looked at an old credit report and I had an additional TU inq that is now over 2 years old which didn't show back up.

I wish I had the money back wasted on bumpage.


(looking couple of years into the future) There's a class-action suit against TU for charging people money and providing inaccurate reports in return . The most prevalent inaccuracy is alleged to be missing (entirely through TU's fault) "soft" or "hard" inquiries. This time around plaintiffs are not going to settle for N months of the same crappy CR monitoring. TU may have to file for bankruptcy as a result of the court's verdict.

Last name is 'O'...checked PrivacyMatters today, went from 4 inq's to 12 inq's

Can't believe people are really thinking Trans Union did anything wrong. They provided the service they advertised, No mention of bumpage anywhere. People found a loop hole and used them in a manner not intended.

scott1961 said: Can't believe people are really thinking Trans Union did anything wrong. They provided the service they advertised, No mention of bumpage anywhere. People found a loop hole and used them in a manner not intended.
I agree, somewhat.

cyberkost has a point though. TU charged for the service of providing accurate credit reports and failed to do so by allowing a flaw in their system to remain unchanged for years. Sure, we were happy about that flaw because it allowed us to conduct AORs. However, the fact remains that the service that they advertised and we paid for was inaccurate and flawed because of a design inherent in their system.

abracadabra1 said: scott1961 said: Can't believe people are really thinking Trans Union did anything wrong. They provided the service they advertised, No mention of bumpage anywhere. People found a loop hole and used them in a manner not intended.
I agree, somewhat.

cyberkost has a point though. TU charged for the service of providing accurate credit reports and failed to do so by allowing a flaw in their system to remain unchanged for years. Sure, we were happy about that flaw because it allowed us to conduct AORs. However, the fact remains that the service that they advertised and we paid for was inaccurate and flawed because of a design inherent in their system.
Not inaccurate, just 'limited'. The data was correct, just limited to the most recent ~60 inquiries. And the service claimed to provide a copy of your credit report, which it did in fact provide - the copy you got was the same as anyone requesting your report would get.

Any potential lawsuit would have to be based on the FCRA, as you would be claiming the report was inaccurate. But since these missing inquiries would've had a generally negative effect, you'd be hard pressed to claim you suffered any damages from this flaw.

Besides, there is no requirement that any piece of data must be reported. Only that what data is reported must be correct.

Glitch99 said: abracadabra1 said: scott1961 said: Can't believe people are really thinking Trans Union did anything wrong. They provided the service they advertised, No mention of bumpage anywhere. People found a loop hole and used them in a manner not intended.
I agree, somewhat.

cyberkost has a point though. TU charged for the service of providing accurate credit reports and failed to do so by allowing a flaw in their system to remain unchanged for years. Sure, we were happy about that flaw because it allowed us to conduct AORs. However, the fact remains that the service that they advertised and we paid for was inaccurate and flawed because of a design inherent in their system.
Not inaccurate, just 'limited'. The data was correct, just limited to the most recent ~60 inquiries. And the service claimed to provide a copy of your credit report, which it did in fact provide - the copy you got was the same as anyone requesting your report would get.

Any potential lawsuit would have to be based on the FCRA, as you would be claiming the report was inaccurate. But since these missing inquiries would've had a generally negative effect, you'd be hard pressed to claim you suffered any damages from this flaw.

You appear infinitely more well versed in the law than me, so I'll accept your answer

Also everyone playing this game knew exactly what they were doing and goal was to bump and used multiple sources to accomplish this, So how do you turn around sue? Just so typical nowadays, Sue even though you were at fault. Better to just move on and find some new method

I was using myprivacymatters.com since around Sept 07, 7 inquiries popped back, than god a few were from 2006 so they will be off in the next few months... now to cancel my account...

74ak said: Glitch99 said:
I've had ~55 CK pulls since those inquiries. So allowing for some soft pulls from creditors over the past 8 months, it seem that bumpage may still be working as always - requiring the estimated 60-70 pulls to fill up your file - but now excludes TU/TC-based services. My remaining 5 inquiries that had been re-added *should* drop off again after another week of CK updates, if this is in fact true.


to confirm: I was using TC ans CS to b* 3 months. Lately I am pulling CS (EX based)only. 2 days ago 2 inqs on TU were back, 1 of them is gone today. Also, I used CS only fo my GF, and none of TU inqs is back

Today my 2nd inq dropped. B* continues

I don't expect consumers have any legitimate complaint against TU for their previous flaw and apparent resolution for it. They don't have any contract with us about how scores are calculated or how much data they store.

Lenders, OTOH, should have a major gripe. Closing the loophole isn't the problem, it's that there was a known loophole for so long. And one seemingly dependent on storage space? That's absurd. I bet the users on FWF alone are using enough free gmail and yahoo mail storage space to hold all of TU's consumer data.

If I were sitting on a large number of bad loans and had used TU credit data as part of the approval process, I'd be getting pretty subpoena-ey. Did TU have but withhold, for whatever reason, negative information about any of them?

But who knows, CRA is not a very competitive industry, maybe TU was able to get away with disclosing the flaw and getting lender acceptance of the limitation.



Disclaimer: By providing links to other sites, FatWallet.com does not guarantee, approve or endorse the information or products available at these sites, nor does a link indicate any association with or endorsement by the linked site to FatWallet.com.

Thanks for visiting FatWallet.com. Join for free to remove this ad.

TRUSTe online privacy certification

While FatWallet makes every effort to post correct information, offers are subject to change without notice.
Some exclusions may apply based upon merchant policies.
© 1999-2014