CreditCourt Forum 2004 Credit Suit Blog CreditCourt & BayHouse Newsletter BayHouse FAQ Fight Back!!! Forum CreditFactors CreditForum.org CreditCourt Forum

FTC & FCC: Exhibits AA - AI Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

CreditCourt Forum » Baker v. Fair Isaac, CRAs , American Agencies, Pacific Bell ... » Exhibits » FTC & FCC: Exhibits AA - AI « Previous Next »

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Christine
Board Administrator
Username: Christine

Post Number: 1880
Registered: 09-2002
Posted on Sunday, February 29, 2004 - 12:52 am:   Edit Post Delete Post Print Post    Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

EXHIBITS FTC & FCC

application/octet-stream1/2/04 FTC & FCC Exhibits
1-26-04 Exhibits-AA-AI.doc (66.0 k)


EXHIBIT AA - 1/23/04 ConsumerInfo.com (PrivacyGuard) tri-merged report

For easier reading, plaintiff annotated the report.

1) missing “soft” inquiries
2) unreported limits
3) Trans Union accounts incorrectly reported as “unrated”
4) accounts prematurely deleted


EXHIBIT AB - 1/21/04 myFICO.com Experian report with 658 FICO score

1) Where are the “soft” inquiries and balance and limit history?
2) Why are entire pages filled with useless payment history?


EXHIBIT AC - 1/21/04 Experian CreditExpert report

1) Experian refusal of plaintiff’s attempt to dispute online.
2) Pages 1-10 of the CreditExpert report, pages 11-21 are omitted as they contain the inquiries and personal data.


EXHIBIT AD – The FTC is not enforcing FCRA, ignoring complaints and its own Consent Decrees

1) 9/16/03 - The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) filing: “Before the Federal Trade Commission, In the Matter of Experian, Complaint and Request for Injunction, Investigation and for Other Relief.” EPIC urged the FTC to take immediate action.
2) 8/18/95 - FTC announcement of the Equifax Consent Decree
3) 1/00 - FTC Consent Decree with Equifax
4) 7/03 - FTC and Equifax Modification
5) 8/30/01 - Plaintiff’s inquiry with the FTC about the Equifax Consent Decree enforcement. Plaintiff did not receive a reply.
6) 2001 - At http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fcra/index.htm the FTC publishes numerous opinion letters in the 90s, there are a few in 2000 and 2001, nothing since.
7) 1/22/04 – FTC listing of 5 “Recent Commission Actions – Enforcement” since 1998.
8) 1/04 – FTC “Annual Report 2003: Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.” The FTC has 4 recommendations for changes of the FDCPA, all to benefit collectors.


EXHIBIT AE - FTC web site publications about Identity Theft

1) 9/3/03 - The FTC wrote at http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2003/09/idtheft.htm:

“The Federal Trade Commission today released a survey showing that 27.3 million Americans have been victims of identity theft in the last five years, including 9.9 million people in the last year alone. According to the survey, last year’s identity theft losses to businesses and financial institutions totaled nearly $48 billion and consumer victims reported $5 billion in out-of-pocket expenses.”

2) 1/18/04 - “When Bad Things Happen To Your Good Name.” 38 pages of FTC recommendations on dealing with ID theft.

3) 1/18/04 - Plaintiff’s ID theft complaint at the FTC site at https://rn.ftc.gov/pls/dod/widtpubl$.startup?Z_ORG_CODE=PU03

4) 1/18/04 - Submission resulted in nothing but: “Thanks for submitting your complaints through the electronic complaint form” and plaintiff received no confirmation and can’t update her complaint.

5) 1/16/04 - FTC Release at http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2004/01/healthcareresubmit.htm:

“The Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice today requested that any person who submitted electronic comments regarding the agencies’ joint antitrust hearings on Health Care and Competition Law and Policy between June 1, 2003, and October 22, 2003, resubmit those comments. Comments submitted during that time were not received due to technological errors.”


EXHIBIT AF – More FTC advertisements for the CRAs

1) 1/17/04 - “Sharing Your Personal Information: It's Your Choice” at http://www.ftc.gov/privacy/protect.htm provides free advertising for the CRAs. The FTC: “Visit the web site or phone each bureau for their most up-to-date information”

2) 1/17/04 - The link to Experian goes to a page with ads and NO information about privacy.

3) 1/17/04 - The link to Equifax goes to a page with nothing but ads and NO information about privacy.

4) 1/18/04 - The Equifax link titled “Protect yourself from Identity Thieves” leads to the signup page for CreditWatch, the $60 - $120/year Equifax credit monitoring services.

5) 1/18/04 - The link to Trans Union goes to a page with NO additional information and the option to opt out by phone is hardly visible.

Trans Union engaged in porn sales techniques, disabling the “back” button on plaintiff’s browser and preventing her from going back to the FTC site.


EXHIBIT AG - FCC proof of service as filed with the Court.

9/22/03 – The date on the Domestic Return Receipt, plaintiff mailed the complaint and summons to the address provided by the FCC by certified mail.


EXHIBIT AH - T-Mobile refusal to cancel plaintiff’s T-Mobile account.

1) 7/7/02 - Plaintiff’s cancellation fax to T-Mobile, after the phone cancellation was refused.

2) 8/7/02 - Plaintiff called again when the new bill didn’t reflect the cancellation. Wes, ID 0653751, confirmed receipt of the cancellation fax, but refused to adjust the billing to the date of the faxed cancellation.

3) 9/6/02 - Plaintiff’s FCNB statement with the 8/26/02 $22.58 regular monthly charge by VoiceStream/T-Mobile charge.

4) 9/02 - VoiceStream (T-Mobile) ran plaintiff’s Trans Union credit without a permissible purpose.

5) 1/7/03 - Plaintiff’s request for refund and “intent to sue” as T-Mobile had failed to adjust the closing date.

6) 2/10/03 - Plaintiff’s request for refund and disclosure of permissible purpose were ignored.


EXHIBIT AI - Verizon (GTE) billing fraud and the FCC refusal to investigate. Just like VoiceStream/T-Mobile, they ignored plaintiff’s many cancellations after plaintiff left California in 11/98 and they refused to adjust the cancellation date. Then they billed fraudulent charges and assigned the account for collection.

1) 6/9/99 - Plaintiff’s cancelled check for $85.

2) 7/16/99 - Plaintiff verified the 0 balance.

3) 7/23/99 - GTE Mobilnet check to plaintiff for $90.42. Plaintiff did not cash the check and still has the original check.

4) 6/1/00 - GTE Wireless Regulatory Department Administrator Kay Howe: “We found no record indicating we refunded the customer $90.42.”

5) 10/17/00 – The FCC’s Linda Kuhn fax with the demand for the $165 filing fee and 13 pages of forms and instructions, including the advice to retain an attorney due to the “quite technical” requirements.

6) 8/5/02 – Dymacol collection threatening the cosigner with “serious impact on your credit reputation.”

Add Your Message Here
Post:
Bold text Italics Underline Create a hyperlink Insert a clipart image

Username: Posting Information:
This is a private posting area. Only registered users and moderators may post messages here.
Password:
Options: Enable HTML code in message
Automatically activate URLs in message
Action:

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | User List | Help/Instructions | Program Credits Administration