Empoyers Who Request Credit Reports!!!

LuckyLadybug · Jan 3, 2004

I can definitely see why they do that in banking you have to be able to be bonded. However I have seen incidences where someone in a financial institution had a perfect credit report and ended up embezzling money from the bank a credit report in itself cannot predict someones future behavior be it good be it bad:)

LilRedRN1973 · Jan 3, 2004

This may be true, but if you have a bill that you KNOWINGLY have not paid, do you think it will just go away, if you ignore registered mail, or move from a previous address...I believe Melanie admits she knew about her bills

Excuse me, but you need to go back and READ my posts. I WAS paying my bills...it was not sufficient to the hospital's standards. I have NEVER not paid a bill that I owed. Why do you think I continued to pay on my credit cards even after I filed bankruptcy?? I could have just as easily put THOSE onto my bankruptcy and wiped my hands clean. I was NEVER notified of the seizure, by regular, registered, or certified mail. Why do you think I was shocked when my account was seized? My attorney said it happens all the time. The collection agency will "attempt" to contact the person who owes money. Yes, I was notified of the wage garnishment almost a year before my funds were seized. I ended leaving that job for another and was never notified of anything until my money was frozen. I was paying the collection agency money each month and after the 3rd month of paying them, I received my uncashed check in the mail with a letter stating that my monthly payment was not sufficient. This was another thing that surprised my attorney because she said that as long as you are attempting to pay SOMETHING, they will most likely leave you alone. But we have since found out that this particular collection agency is ruthless and does this quite frequently. As I said before, it's all in the past and I'm much wiser now. Why on earth would I want to waste MORE of my time pursuing this whole funds seizure issue when I've already filed the bankruptcy, had it discharged, and am on my way to improving my credit?? I have better things to do with my time (like post on allnurses.com.....or do homework! = )

I wanted to add in here that in no way do I absolve myself of the debt I had. I do not think that I should not have to pay for services rendered. The hospitals and ambulances provided me with a service for which I had to pay. It's unfortunate I was not able to make more money to meet the monthly payments the one hospital required. I certainly am not interested in any type of pity party and am not trying to drum up any sympathy. I screwed up, plain and simple. My biggest mistake was not having medical insurance. I have since paid the price (yes, even though I filed bankruptcy, I kept all my credit debt and have been denied many things due to my bankruptcy). I learned many valuable lessons and am now much more aware of financial matters. I'm not looking for anyone to read my story and go "aw, poor girl". I was not a victim. I was simply trying to explain that although I filed bankruptcy, I am not, nor have I ever been, a deadbeat who feels like I'm owed something.

Sheri257 · Jan 3, 2004

Originally posted by RNnTraining1973
I was NEVER notified of the seizure, by regular, registered, or certified mail. Why do you think I was shocked when my account was seized? My attorney said it happens all the time.

This is just a point of information. But yes, it does happen all of the time. The reason is: You've already been notified of the lawsuit and subsequent judgement. Since the bank seizure comes after that, no additional notification is required.

Besides, if they did notify everyone about bank account seizures, people would close their accounts and withdraw funds. There would be no means to collect, and the bank seizure would be pointless.

I've been on both sides of this. And I have seized some bank accounts, just to find others closed shortly thereafter. And, BTW, these were people who showed up in court and knew they had a judgement pending against them. They immediately closed all of their accounts as soon as the first seizure went through, because they were trying to dodge payment.

Luckily, it didn't matter much, because the first two accounts had enough of a balance to cover the outstanding judgement. Otherwise, I would have been screwed. I could have seized some property or put liens on it, but who knows how much I would have collected from that, if anything.

Quite frankly, I'm glad there wasn't any notification because that's how I was finally able to collect the money that was owed to me. I had already been through a lot of hassle with a bunch of court hearings.

I know there isn't much sympathy for collections around here, but it's a tough job. It is a major hassle because there are many procedures you have to follow. And I do believe those procedures do a pretty good job of protecting the innocent, so to speak.

Mr_D · Jan 3, 2004

Originally posted by lizz
... The reason is: You've already been notified of the lawsuit and subsequent judgement. Since the bank seizure comes after that, no additional notification is required . . . .

. . . And I do believe those procedures do a pretty good job of protecting the innocent, so to speak . . .

OK I got it. You are in business now and really don't really care how the process works as long it serves your needs. Your position is beginning to make more sense.

Melanie, save your breath. There's no use in this conversation.

Lizz, as far as your last statement . . . you are living in your own reality:

IDTheft Statistics 1

Notice the Big Red Letters in the middle of the page, pasted here for everyone's convenience:

Identity theft is the fastest growing crime in America. The average victim spends 175 hours and $1000.00 repairing the damage.

The next FTC document covers your home state of California.

California Stats

Here's a quote from the document I selected for this thread (bold added).

... In the meantime, they are often unable to obtain credit and financial services, telecommunication and utility services, and sometimes employment.

Wages may be garnished, or tax refunds withheld, due to the bad debts or other penalties levied in their names. Where the identity thief has created a criminal record in the victim's name, consumers report having driving and other licenses revoked, failing background checks for employment and other purposes, and even being arrested and detained.

So your quote again is:

Originally posted by lizz
. . . And I do believe those procedures do a pretty good job of protecting the innocent, so to speak . . . [/b]

Alrighty then . . . .

So if someone who is totally innocent can't easily clear their name . . . but the system generally works for folks in Melanie's situation?

LOL ! !

BTW -- While looking for these links, I found out on the FTC site that some protections we addressed on this board expired Jan 1 2004 unless Congress renewed them. I don't know know if that happened or not.

Mr. D.

Sheri257 · Jan 3, 2004

Your post doesn't make much sense Mr. D. Your talking about identity theft and problems with credit reports. I'm talking about the court system and judgements.

Two completely different things, unless you're talking about judgements and bankruptcies showing up on credit reports.

If you're trying to say that the remedies in the court system aren't available for victims of identity theft, then I probably would agree with you. There are remedies for both, but the remedies themselves are completely different.

I'm not really sure what you are trying to say here, actually. :confused:

Sheri257 · Jan 3, 2004

Originally posted by Mr_D
OK I got it. You are in business now and really don't really care how the process works as long it serves your needs. Your position is beginning to make more sense.

This is way out of line, BTW. I don't care about the process as long as it serves my needs? Where the hell you do get that?

You have to PROVE your case. You have to respect the process. Otherwise, you can't do a damn thing. I've always proved my cases, followed every procedure, and won every case.

Yeah, I did seize people's bank accounts who had ripped me off. I proved that in court, and I had a right to collect, so I did. If you don't like it, I don't give a damn.

I could return your insulting remarks, but you're a waste of time.

I'm done with this. Ramble on ...

Havin' A Party!, ASN, RN · Jan 3, 2004

Mr_D -- Don't believe you're reading Lizz's post accurately. And, as a consequence, perhaps totally mixing apples with kiwi fruits on, at least, two points.

She's openly admitted in this thread that she's been on both sides of the issue being discussed here: as a debtor and as a creditor. That would seem, to me, to engender her with a better vantage point than if she'd only experienced things from one point of view.

Moreover, think your last response (dealing with identity theft) to her is a non sequitur. She said absolutely nothing about that in the post you referenced. The subject of the post you're challenging strictly involves her thoughts on debt collection and the related procedures (enforcing judgments, etc.).

Mr_D · Jan 3, 2004

Originally posted by lizz
Your post doesn't make much sense Mr. D. Your talking about identity theft and problems with credit reports. I'm talking about the court system and judgements.

Two completely different things, unless you're talking about judgements and bankruptcies showing up on credit reports.

If you're trying to say that the remedies in the court system aren't available for victims of identity theft, then I probably would agree with you. There are remedies for both, but the remedies themselves are completely different.

I'm not really sure what you are trying to say here, actually.

Ok -- I see it's confusing.

I don't see it as two completely different things. The credit system, the collection process, ID theft, the judiciary are interwined -- and fail more than they should.

If the system (as a whole) can be manipulated and used to destroy

(a) the credit of innocent person

(b) a person who is making every effort to satisfy the creditors (Melanie's case)

Then IMHO the system is fatally flawed.

I also point out that if a person who is 100% innocent (ID Theft) can't find justice in the system, then I highly disagree with your assertion that the system generally works. Or, may should qualify that, it may work for a few a special interests.

And I don't buy your assertion that it's 100% responsibility of the people to sort out this legal morass. The system-designers have to take responsibility somewhere. And they don't.

I would love for you to have a better way of collecting your debts -- but not at the expense of innocent people. I won't accept collateral damage.

Mr_D

Mr_D · Jan 3, 2004

Originally posted by lizz
This is way out of line, BTW. I don't care about the process as long as it serves my needs? Where the hell you do get that?

You have to PROVE your case. You have to respect the process. Otherwise, you can't do a damn thing. I've always proved my cases, followed every procedure, and won every case.

Yeah, I did seize people's bank accounts who had ripped me off. I proved that in court, and I had a right to collect, so I did. If you don't like it, I don't give a damn.

I could return your insulting remarks, but you're a waste of time.

I'm done with this. Ramble on ...

I call as I see it. I witnessed how you related to Melanie, in summary, a condescending know-it-all manner.

I'd said many times that I'm not about protecting the guilty. I happy you won your cases. I haven't heard you say anything about protecting the innocent. In fact, you indicated that given the desparation of collecting debt, you are willing to accept "collateral damage" (To answer your question, that is where I got it from.)

I've had my own experience in these matters re ID theft. I was treated like a criminal. No, I don't have to respect this system. If I get ensnared again, I'll work it just as you did, but until some substantial improvements are made, I'll never respect it.

If I said anything that's not supported in these posts -- then I am out of line and I truly apologize. I'm not interested flinging insults. I do get quite passionate in debate.

Rambling on to the playground . . .

Mr_D

Mr_D · Jan 3, 2004

Originally posted by LarryG
. . . That would seem, to me, to engender her with a better vantage point than if she'd only experienced things from one point of view. . .

I appreciate your response -- my last two posts address most of it.

I think Lizz would be in a more powerful place if she shared more.

In dealing with this stuff, there's no acknowlegement (that I recall) of her being a novice at this at any time. In relating to others, she doesn't share any of the confusion, dead-ends, frustration, outrage, despair etc, etc, as she learned about this system inside out.

Instead, she appears more distant and "expert like", and comes off as "It's easy, just do it". Combine that with some moralistic responsibility language and she does come off as insensitive (she acknowledged that).

She didn't learn responsibility in one day. I would guess that it was a process over several years, there were some real bad days and a few bumps in the road. Her vantage point would be far superior if she allowed other's the same learning curve.

Mr_D

Havin' A Party!, ASN, RN · Jan 3, 2004

Mr_D -- My experience with all the boards I've been associated with is that we all come to them from different life experiences, backgrounds, maturity levels, sensitivities, etc. And from all that, our impressions of the discussion, and even the tone of individual messages, are colored.

For example, IMO, Lizz has already shared a ton of helpful info with all of us here. Several folks following the thread have expressed their appreciation for her doing so, and I'd suspect many of the other silent ones have probably learned a lot as well.

Also, I read into her posts that she once was a novice on this topic -- hence, some of the tips and suggestions she's advised us on likely stem from lessons under her belt. If she's chosen not to focus on some of the more personal stuff -- e.g., her feelings, and some of the other items you list -- we can all respect that.

Further, where she comes off to you as "expert-like" and, maybe even, condescending, I see her as simply talking plainly about the "system." Like you (and probably everybody), I wish there never was any "collateral damage" with any generalized process or system. But here's where reality pops in. We can wish all we want, but in our society, there'll always be some -- because no procedure, applicable to all, will be a perfect fit for everyone's particular situation.

RN Rotten Nurse · Jan 3, 2004

I worked in collections at a credit union before I became a nurse. I've been a nurse for 15 years now. It's been my experience that people that don't pay their bills and on time, generally are the same employees that are frequently tardy for work, call in ill frequently, and just basically unreliable. I can understand why employers check credit reports. If I were a business owner, I would do the same thing before hiring an employee.