CoreLogic Inc

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID...

[redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
They have had plenty of time to respond to my complaint.  To ask for additional time is really to avoid the issue at hand. They should have been able to fulfill my request over the phone as offered in the letter.
Regards,
[redacted]

In her complaint, Ms. [redacted] states that she did not authorize a credit inquiry on March 4, 2016 that is appearing on her credit report, and she would like for the inquiry to be removed from her credit report.Please note that CoreLogic Credco (“Credco”) is not a creditor. Rather, it is a reseller of...

the credit information provided by the three national consumer reporting agencies ([redacted], [redacted], [redacted], collectively, the “NCRAs”). Each time we prepare a new credit report for our clients (who are typically lenders, automotive dealerships, or other qualified end-users), we order the credit information from one or more of the three NCRAs. In order to obtain a credit report from Credco, our clients certify that they have a permissible purpose under the Fair Credit Reporting Act to do so. Pursuant to section 607(e) of the FCRA, each time that Credco orders credit information from the NCRAs to prepare a report, Credco is required to provide to the NCRAs the identity of its clients requesting the report. The NCRAs maintain a history of inquiries within their files.Our records indicate the following:On or around March 4, 2016, our client, [redacted], ordered Ms. [redacted]’ credit report through Credco that contained credit information obtained from each of the NCRAs. We contacted [redacted] to confirm that it had a permissible purpose to access her credit report. [redacted] informed us that it accessed Ms. [redacted]’ credit report pursuant to her verbal authorization in connection with a mortgage transaction. [redacted] informed us that when the loan application was initially taken for [redacted], Ms. [redacted]’ spouse, it was a joint application with Ms. [redacted]. After [redacted] was given verbal authorization to pull a joint report, the borrowers determined that they only wanted Mr. [redacted] on the application and proceeded as such.Page 1 of 2If Ms. [redacted] believes that [redacted] did not have a permissible purpose to order her credit report, or if she has any questions regarding its inquiry, she should contact [redacted] directly at:[redacted] - [redacted]If Ms. [redacted] believes that she has been the victim of identity theft, she should contact the Federal Trade Commission at:FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION Consumer Response Center Room 130-B 600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Washington, D.C. 20580 1-877-438-4338 www.identitytheft.govIf Ms. [redacted] is still concerned about who can access her credit report, then she may want to contact the NCRAs directly to request that a security freeze be placed on her credit files the NCRAs maintain on her. A security freeze is designed to prevent the information in her credit files from being reported to others (such as credit grantors and other companies) without her consent. Information regarding how to place a security freeze on her credit files can be found at the following NCRA websites:[redacted]: https://www.[redacted].com/freeze/center.html [redacted]: http://www.[redacted].com/help/credit-freeze/en_cp [redacted]: http://www.[redacted].com/personal-credit/credit-disputes/credit-f[redacted]Ms. [redacted] may also wish to add a statement to her files maintained by the NCRAs disputing the accuracy or completeness of the [redacted] inquiry, as such inquiry would be reflected, and is maintained, in the files the NCRAs maintain on her. Their addresses, phone numbers and websites are as follows:[redacted] Trans Union P.O. Box 2002 P.O. Box 740241 P.O. Box 2000 Allen, TX 75013 Atlanta, GA 30374 Chester, PA 19022 Attn: NCAC Attn: Disputes Attn: Disputes 1-888-397-3742 1-800-685-1111 1-800-916-8800 www.[redacted].com www.[redacted].com www.[redacted].comIf Ms. [redacted] has any further questions, she may contact our Consumer Services department at 1- 800-637-2422.Sincerely,CoreLogic Credco

We are still in the process of researching this matter.  As such, we respectfully request an extension until April 15th to provide a definitive response.
Thank you.

This email is in response to the correspondence we received from your office regarding the complaint filed by Mr. [redacted]. 
In his complaint, Mr. [redacted] states that SafeRent is reporting incorrect information about him and he desires to have such information corrected.
Please note that CoreLogic...

SafeRent ("SafeRent") is a consumer reporting agency as defined in the Fair Credit Reporting Act ("FCRA").  SafeRent maintains public landlord/tenant and criminal court records, which it provides to its clients who are typically property management companies and landlords in the multi-family housing industry for the purposes of determining housing eligibility of an applicant.
We have conducted a search of our records and have been unable to locate any file on Mr. [redacted].   In order to better assist Mr. [redacted], we request that he call our Consumer Services Department at 1-888-333-2413, or write to us at: CoreLogic SafeRent, Attn: Consumer Disputes Dept., P.O. Box 509124, San Diego, California, 92150.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint.  For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.  I was rejected when applying for an apartment because of the information contained in your report about me.
Regards,
[redacted]

Review: This company is reporting false information and would like to have it removed from my rental history report.

Business

Response:

In

her complaint, [redacted] states that there is incorrect information being

reported in her CoreLogic [redacted] ("[redacted]") consumer report, and she

requests that such inaccurate information be corrected.

Review: CoreLogic has proven wholly incapable of explaining the results of their own Credit Score Disclosures. I applied for a mortgage and received a bank copy of the report. While my Score is high (800), there are 'Key Factors Adversely Affecting Score' that when queried, CoreLogic was incapable of providing specific details of what was behind the factors. Example: "Ratio of Balance to Limit on Bank Revolving Accts too high". What does this mean when your ONLY credit card is 20+ yrs old; you have an $18K limit; your monthly balance is about $1,200; you pay it off every month; and the customer service rep sees the same pattern for as long as there's a history? Answer: they can only guess and give 'suspected reasons'.

My first call to get answers was on 7/20/15. The rep spent an hour guessing 'why' these factors are being reported, but couldn't explain them when looking at my perfect record of paying my single credit card and my mortgage (I have no other debt). To placate, he said he would open a 'Complaint Ticket', gave me the number, and said the 'Compliance, Research, and Review Dept' would call me back; they never did. So on 10/21/15 I again called. Same vague answers from the rep. He was unaware of such 'Complaint Tickets'. Oh, I get it: I was played by the first Rep. He too was patient and spent his time only guessing about the 'adverse factors'. Then came the passing of the buck. Said they're only '3rd party'. Tried explaining that the real culprit is some 'FAIR ISSAC'. He said he would email his supervisor ([redacted]) and also let me leave Mr. [redacted] a voice mail. No response yet but not holding my breath.

Bottom line is that the people monitoring and reporting on your Credit worthiness do not seem to be competent or knowledgeable enough to have such an important task. CoreLogic gets an 'F' from this Consumer.Desired Settlement: I desire to know the specific details (not the canned generalizations) behind the 'Adverse Factors' on my report such that I can take corrective action if needed. If those 'Adverse Factors' are as I suspect - completely bogus, then I wish for them to be removed. If the software logic needs to be changed to prevent bogus Adverse Factors from showing, then I suggest they change it.

Business

Response:

In

his complaint, Mr. [redacted] states that he did not receive a sufficient

explanation from CoreLogic [redacted] (“[redacted]”) regarding his credit score. Mr.

[redacted] desires to know the specific details regarding the factors that impacted

his score.

Rather than make a simple 2 letter correction to my client's report (adding NE to his address), Corelogic Credco advised me that I have to pull an entire new credit report, for full charge, which of course would be yet another inquiry on our client's report. I reached out to my assigned rep about a different issue last month, but never got a reply. After my call to customer service today, I called my rep and left a voice mail. Then I e-mailed him, and cc'd the company VP. No response from anyone. If you are a mortgage professional, be warned: Corelogic will suck every last dime out of you, refuse to work with you even if you're a frequent customer, and will NEVER reply to your concerns.

Review: I have unauthorized inquires on my credit reports. I have NO KNOWLEDGE of this company and did not give them permission to inquire. I have sent multiple letters asking them to remove them with no response.Desired Settlement: I want these inquires removed from my credit bureau reports immediately.

Business

Response:

I am sorry but you have contacted the wrong CoreLogic entity.

Our division does not sell or support credit related product or offerings.

This is a complaint that is FCRA (Consumer Credit) related. Our group is not able to resolve FCRA related issues, nor should we be involved.

You may be looking for Corelogic Credco or Corelogic Saferent.

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me. I will wait for the business to perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolved.

Regards,

Review: I had a background check completed at an apartment complex that used Corelogic SafeRent to perform the task. I was denied occupancy due to erroneous information provided by Corelogic SafeRent. It appears that it's their core business to perform consumer data analysis and report relevant and accurate information but that didn't happen in my case. I perform data analysis and statistical pattern matching in the course and scope of my job and if I did such haphazard analysis I would get fired. Apparently, it's adequate to just use a simple name query to ruin someone’s reputation. They matched me with someone who lives in another state where I have not only ever lived but have not even been to in my entire life. So they provided a negative finding against me when they only used a single data point to make a match. I suspect they have access to my credit file which they could have used to determine that I was not the same person and that I have never lived, worked, paid taxes, bought a car, etc. at the location in question.

The person I was matched against has lived and committed crimes in the same place since the late 1980's to the present. During all that time I have had myriad fiduciary related jobs and licenses that have required extensive federal and state background checks which included performing a fingerprint analysis. I have never had this sort of thing happen before. I suspect that is a systemic problem with Corelogic since I have found a number of complaints from other consumers that have had the same issue. I called to have my file updated and was told by a representative that a supervisor would and could expedite the removal of the erroneous information. I called again today to inquire if it had actually gone to a supervisor and was told that it had not and would not be sent to a supervisor since there was no way for anyone to expedite a ticket. I asked to speak to a supervisor and was told by [redacted] (Supervisor) that the latter was true and that by law they had up to 30 days to fix the issue. I get it, things take time but 30 days is too long when it only took 30 minutes to ruin me. They could add value for the customer (me) by contacting the apartment and let them know that the issue has been resolved so I don't have to take a hit for having multiple inquiries and fees.Desired Settlement: Correct my file immediately and contact the apartments and clear me to rent. Fix the glitch.

Business

Response:

This e-mail is in response to correspondence we received from your office regarding the complaint filed by Mr. [redacted].

Review: This company provided a negative background check on me to an apartment complex I was trying to move into. When I called them for an explanation, they asked for my name, address, mortgage information, social security number, etc. After reluctantly providing this information, they told me they had provided information to the apartment complex on the wrong person, a Mr. [redacted], not me, [redacted]. I was asked to call the apartment complex and tell them to call Core Logic SafeRent back, which I did. Later I received a call from the apartment complex stating Core Logic SafeRent, LLC said I could clear my name by calling another number and faxing my drivers license and social security card to them. I refused to do this. After several more calls to Core Logic SafeRent, LLC, the lady on the phone gave me multiple aliases for herself and wouldn't let me speak to her superior when I asked for more information on the company. There is something very "fishy" going on with this company, and to top it all off, I have to start over on trying to find a place to live with only four days to go before I have to report to work in that state.Desired Settlement: Please look into this company as their professionalism and ethics are lacking. I would like to have disclosure of the information against my good name.

Business

Response:

This is in response to the e-mail message we received from your office on April 16, 2014, regarding the complaint filed with your office by Mr. [redacted].

Review: My company, [redacted], Inc. has been a subscriber of CoreLogic since 2010. On 1/1/14, our company merged with another company and we no longer need their service. Along with my 11/15/13 monthly payment AND my 12/14/13 payment, I made a notation on the remittance stub to cancel our subscription effective 1/1/14. On 2/11/14, I was notified that our account was past due. I emailed copies of the Nov & Dec remittance stubs to CSR. On 3/14/14, I rec'd another call from another CSR threatening suspension. After being referred to a mgr, I was then notified that our account will be cancelled on 2/28/14 as they cannot honor a handwritten note. If that were the case, I should have been notified back in 11/13. On 4/7/14, I rec'd a letter stating that our account is past due and will be assigned to a collection agency. Besides the letters and emails, they continue to call. I have done my due diligence by giving them adequate (2 mos) notification. I have evidence that my notes were received as I have copies of my cancelled checks.Desired Settlement: I would like CoreLogic to remove the balance due and backdate cancellation to 12/31/13 as originally requested.

Business

Response:

This e-mail correspondence is in response to our telephone conversation of earlier today regarding the status of our response to the complaint filed with your office by Ms. [redacted].

Please note that our records reflect that account balances have been written off and the issue has been closed with the consumer. We have contacted the consumer directly and informed her that the issue should be resolved.

Please let me know if you have any additional questions.

Thank you.

Sr. Manager, Operational Compliance

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me.

Regards,

Review: I never applied for a loan. Credco did a hard pull on all three credit reports and I have a fraud alert and never gave permission to pull my credit. They did this with Discover HOme Loans.Desired Settlement: I want the hard inquiry removed from [redacted] credit reports.

Business

Response:

In her

complaint, Ms. [redacted] states that she never applied for a loan with Discover

Home Loans and she requests that the inquiry be removed from her Equifax,

Experian and TransUnion credit reports.

Review: I am looking at my credit report and saw an inquiry from [redacted] Jun17 th which I didn't authorize.[redacted] Miscellaneous Jun 17, 2013 EquifaxDesired Settlement: Please remove this inquiry from Equifax ASAP

Business

Response:

In

his complaint, Mr. [redacted] is questioning a CoreLogic [redacted] ("[redacted]") inquiry that is appearing on his credit report.

Review: My husband and I applied at an apartment complex that utilizes safe rent services for verification on credit. They reported incorrect derragory information that resulted in us being denied. When we called to dispute the information they finally deleted it but our credit was ran twice because of an error on there part how tacky is that to lose points for inquiries from the same place twice in less than a week apart I find that to be ludicrous that a company can do thatshouldnt they verify before they report information in my opinion that would be the common sense thing to do.Desired Settlement: I want to be refunded the money that was paid to run this inaccurate report plus additional inquiry removed.

Business

Response:

This is in response to the e-mail message we received from your office on April 1, 2014, regarding the complaint filed with your office by Ms. [redacted].

Corelogic SafeRent, LLC ("SafeRent") is a consumer reporting agency as defined in the Fair Credit Reporting Act ("FCRA"). SafeRent maintains public landlord/tenant and criminal court records, which it provides to its clients who are property owners and landlords in the multi-family housing industry for the purposes of determining housing eligibility of an applicant. Records are returned based upon certain matching criteria; however, due to the nature of public records, the records returned may or may not pertain to the applicant.

Our records indicate that on March 25, 2014, Ms. [redacted]’s husband submitted a dispute to our office regarding the reporting of certain public record information that was appearing on his SafeRent consumer report. In accordance with our obligations under section 611 of the FCRA, we reinvestigated the dispute to determine whether the disputed information was inaccurate, and we recorded the current status of the disputed information, or deleted the information, as applicable, from the file we maintain on the consumer. On March 26, 2014, we mailed the results of our reinvestigation to the consumer.

SafeRent endeavors to provide consumers with a prompt and efficient response. Should you or the consumer have any additional questions or concerns, please feel free to contact us at 1-888-333-2413.

Sincerely,

Corelogic SafeRent

Review: I am filing this complaint because I have tried to contact this company several times to discuss incorrect information that this company proclaim to have in their system. I am trying to discuss with them any inaccurate issues on my credit report and they is giving me the run-around. This inaccurate information is preventing me for obtaining housing in the [redacted] location where I am currently residing in an extended stay hotel. there is some errors on their credit report and I am trying to let them know that they need to correct this information ASAP, but I am constantly being transferred to other people and either getting disconnected.Desired Settlement: They need to correct the error ASAP so the apartment complex can re-run my application and apologize for the error.

Business

Response:

In

her complaint, Ms. [redacted] states that there is inaccurate information being

reported in her CoreLogic SafeRent (“SafeRent”) consumer report.

Review: I applied for an apartment through MAA colonial village at wood lake in Durham NC on June 17,2015 online.

This company core logic safe rent is what they use for their credit checks and recently I found out I have 3 hard inquiries on my report which decrease my score significantly!

One of the credit checks was unauthorized done by the apartment management on June 18, 2015. I would like to dispute a third hard inquiry done July 22, 2015 because there was a problem with the online site and the site should have explained better about what would cause a denial so people are more careful before applying for a hard credit check when they may not be approved ! This should not allowed to even be run that many times because it affect my ability to apply to other apartments when you run check so many times in a short period !

The credit agency used was [redacted].Desired Settlement: Please help get these hard credit checks reversed from my report !, at least some if not all.

Business

Response:

In her complaint,

Ms. [redacted] is questioning several MAA Colonial Village at Woodlake inquiries that are

appearing on her credit report.

Review: [redacted] has been an active client of CoreLogic Credco / CBA Information Solutions for approx. 7 years. Over the past 12 months, we have experienced a large number of billing discrepancies which has caused our account to become deactivated on multiple occasions. Upon receiving notice of any delinquent payment, we would immediately contact the company and provide evidence that our account is not delinquent and our account would be reactivated. This same situation has repeated itself multiple times and, once again, our account has been deactivated even though our payment is on time. In speaking to multiple representatives at CoreLogic Credco, we were made aware that they continue to have a billing system issue and that is causing our account to be incorrect suspended. As a financial instituteDesired Settlement: Due to the multiple incorrect suspensions to our account, [redacted] has suffered significant losses that far exceed the credit we are seeking. We are seeking a $1,000 credit to our account to help cover some of these losses.

Business

Response:

CoreLogic Credco (“Credco”)

maintains a written agreement with [redacted] (“[redacted]”)

whereby Credco provides [redacted] with various products and

services. Credco has been engaged in correspondence and conversation with

the complainant, who has purported to act on behalf of [redacted], in

which he has made demands of Credco similar to those made in his correspondence

to the Revdex.com. Based upon our research into this matter, we have determined

that there is no basis for [redacted]’s demands under the applicable

agreement.

Review: [redacted]I am very concerned regarding the serious possibility that you have not followed thepermissible purpose provisions of the federal FCRA. A credit inquiry for you, [redacted],was placed within my [redacted] credit file in August, 2014. The Act specifies that youmust document your reasons for requesting my report and, when in error, removethem as well. I am depending upon Credco to follow the statute:Desired Settlement: Either providedocumentation that the law was followed by researching the matter at once, or removethis offending inquiry FROM my Equifax as soon as possible.Yours truly,[redacted]

Business

Response:

In her complaint, Ms. [redacted] is

questioning a Corelogic [redacted] ("[redacted]") inquiry that is appearing

on her credit report. Please note that [redacted] is not a credit grantor. Rather,

it is a reseller of the credit information provided by the three national

consumer reporting agencies (Equifax, [redacted], [redacted], collectively, the

"NCRAs"). Each time we prepare a new credit report for our clients

(who are typically lenders and other qualified end-users), we order the credit

information from one or more of the three NCRAs. In order to obtain a credit

report from [redacted], our clients certify that they have a permissible purpose

under the Fair Credit Reporting Act to do so. We would be happy to provide the

name, address and telephone number of our client who accessed Ms. [redacted]’s credit

report through [redacted]. However, the information Ms. [redacted] set forth in her

complaint does not provide enough identifying information for us to locate her

or our client in our computer system. We have left several voicemail messages

for Ms. [redacted] to contact us and provide us with the requested information. To date, Ms. [redacted] has not returned our

calls. Ms. [redacted] can call our toll free

telephone number at [redacted] and ask for Ms. [redacted] who can assist

her.

Review: I contracted with this company as a data provider for my real estate appraisal business. Their data in my market area is flawed, skewed and unreliable and hence, useless as a verification source.The quality of their product is poor, inconsistent and if relied upon, may result in gross deficiencies in my work product. Repeated issues and problems were brought to the attention of my sales person and tech support, with each complaint uncorrected. At one time, my sales person promised to cancel my contract if the problem persisted, which it did. Tech support could not solve the problem and to avoid liability from continued use of the product, I requested to terminate my agreement, giving 30 day written notice. I requested to cancel service and sever the contract in June, 2013 as agreed upon by my sales person. The contract was NOT cancelled and although I did not use the service, billing continued. Repeated phone calls & emails to sales staff and management went (and continue to go) without response. Billing has continued, although I have forwarded all written correspondence to management, sales and collections. There is no response from anyone except collections. All efforts at resolution are useless. The company refuses to address problems with quality of product and the potential liability resulting from use in my business, which relies upon accurate data for lending valuations, on which Federally insured lending decisions are based.Desired Settlement: The contract should be terminated effective June 20, 2013 and all accounts be "paid in full". The provider did take payments from my credit card in June 2013, July 2013 and August, 2013. No monies should be owing.

Business

Response:

CoreLogic Information Solutions will cancel this contract with no monies owed and collection activities to cease.

While the contract signed is an annual contract, it is apparent that the client was not happy with our offering from the start. Even though our contract is binding the client did notify her Sales Rep and Account Manager in writing that she was under the impression that she could cancel. We are unable to find a written reply from CoreLogic personnel stating that we would be adhering to the contract and feel that the contract should be cancelled as requested.

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me. I will wait for the business to perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolved.

Regards,