Re: Permissible Purpose Discussion--Section 604
[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Credit Forum Index ]
Posted by Christina
(152.163.189.170) on December 13, 2002 at 14:14:29:
In Reply to: Re: Permissible Purpose Discussion--Section 604 posted by Dave on December 13, 2002 at 13:09:30:
Being that I currently have a Federal lawsuit filed against a former LL, CA and all 3 CRA's; there are more specific questions that would need to be answered. Has the alleged "debt" been reduced to judgment?, if so, the LL would be a "Judgment Creditor" and the LL or a CA, hired by the LL, would have permissible purpose to pull your report. More than likely, the CRA's would pick it up as a "public record" and report it on your credit record. If the LL did not go to Court: Most LL's would pursue collection on their own (sending letters, phone calls, etc). In this capacity, the LL IS NOT BOUND BY THE FDCPA. When a LL hires a CA to try to collect an "alleged debt", the LL opens themselves up to the liability and restrictions of the FDCPA - the CA must follow the law. In this scenario, the LL WOULD NOT HAVE PERMISSIBLE PURPOSE to pull your report. A LL is not a "CREDITOR" per the FCRA, there is no "extension of credit" extended in a residential lease, the rent is pre-paid. The "review or collection of an account" is for review or collection of a "credit" account, as designated in Riddle (FTC Opinion Letter). I hope this helps, post and let me know.
Follow Ups:
Post a Followup
|
