Is it ethical to try and remove legitimate bad credit?
Yes! One of the best explanations of that is the following article written by Jayson Orvis, Attorney At Law:
"Credit Repair" has not been kind to the American consumer. In fact, the phrase is synonymous with fraud. This is the stigma we face as we offer a membership wherein the client is offered an alternative to "credit prison." Because the nasty reputation of credit repair sometimes washes over into our space, we are often called upon to defend the ethics of our service.
Despite the disrepute which taints credit improvement, our service is clearly analogous to the service provided by a defense attorney. The credit report is no more than an allegation. Unfortunately, most citizens never challenge that allegation. By enlisting the Law Offices through N.A.C.A. to their defense, our clients employ us to enter a plea of "not guilty." We take an affirmative defense; we offer a reasonable alibi and leave it to the bureaus to substantiate their allegation. If the bureau claims to have investigated and affirmed the allegation, we appeal the decision. Eventually, we find that most credit report allegations are at some point untenable and are removed.
SkipTracingThe debt collector is very good at using all the information at their disposal .....
Removing record of a negative credit account, which did actually exist, is undoubtedly ethically sound. We belong to a fundamentally capitalistic civilization and the credit bureaus capitalize on consumer information. Unlike our legal system, the bureaus take no oath to truth, equity and the common good. No American has the moral obligation to support any business venture or corporation, much less a corporation which may well destroy their financial life. The information tended by the credit bureaus is ethically "up for grabs."
The credit bureaus would maintain every piece of credit information forever if it weren't for federal law which has directed them to remove most items after seven years. In essence, the credit bureaus themselves practice credit repair, basically at the seven year mark. If it is right to remove accurate credit accounts after seven years, why would it be wrong to do so in less time?
In relationship to the consumer, the credit bureaus do not concern themselves with the impact of the information. This information often misrepresents the credit worthiness of the consumer. By tagging good citizens as "deadbeats" the bureaus damage the creditors, the economy and, most importantly, the individual. Several policies and techniques employed by the credit bureaus appear most abusive to the American consumer; these we cite as justification of our opposition to the present credit reporting system.
Seven years (10 years for bankruptcy and some court accounts) credit bondage punishes the debtor unjustly. At no point have the credit bureaus ever conducted a study determining seven years to be the point of deadbeat rejuvenation. The seven year mark is entirely arbitrarily. In fact, Dr. Bonnie Gution, adviser to President Bush on consumer affairs, remarked, "...it is our understanding that computer models that predict credit worthiness find most information that is more than two years old nonessential." Based on experience with our clientele, seven years is truly too long. Within a year or two, most consumers completely recover from an economic crisis. For the remaining five or six years, they are left hobbled---forced to rent homes, pay outrageous interest on high risk auto loans, forgo the convenience of credit cards and pay cash for every expenditure. By expelling the consumer from the credit loop, the economy suffers. Our clients come to us on the financial upswing. ......
Read More ...
|
