Yup, however you might wanna make sure and wait for someone else to confirm my answer as I am not sure. Better yet, why don't you call the Discover Card guys because they can give you help better...

So the courts ruled that once you have an account with an entity, they have PP in perpetuity....

Wonderful....

Knock down consumer rights yet another notch.....

Well, that is the holding in that Circuit. That is not to say that a properly articulated argument might not succeed elsewhere. It would also help in presenting the claim to be able to show some form of actual damages....

IMO, Levine failed on multiple levels. And, adding to the irony, by the time he got bounced from court the FIRST time, the inquiry would not even have been viewable by him except by opening the file cabinet to look at old print-outs. Instead, he got to pay $10K (at a minimum, since that represented ONLY the Experian costs) to fail to make a claim that required the intervention of the Courts (and in the interim also served to demonstrate that FTC letter Opinions basically only make for bird cage liners unless you printed them out on rolled two-ply)...

NO ACTUAL MONEY DAMAGES.

But why do they continue long after they are.

PIF.

What do they actually get out of it.

It actually costs them money to pull (even a soft)..

Reading the entire history of the case (to include the filings from all Defendants) would answer many of your questions about WHY they obtained Levine's report.....

A company that I got an auto loan through for 24-month term and paid off continues to pull every 3-6 months. It has been 10 years since I paid off that car..

I called up in person to complainwhy do they still need to look at my reports. Their answer was "in case we want to sell you products." I think what they really mean to say is that these soft pulls get them a LOT more detail than a promotional pull, so once they have the ability to pull a soft on you, they can continue to pull softs forever on you and "watch" your credit..

If you're looking to B*, then I guess you'd be happy about this...

Sorry bout that, I didn't double check the google feed. Read the article, thought it was interesting and relevant and posted it..

It's actually just as well that you did since it serves as a valuable reminder to people that they are not immune from cost assessments when they lose their case...maybe that will make some with claims that are, at best, tenuous to reconsider filing just so that they can be a nuisance to someone...

I did not read anything other then what was posted here - but wouldn't it have been better to go after the party that did the pull, if they did not have PP?.

(Just a question in general - maybe not specific to this case).

I see that along the same lines as FoI that report incorrectly. A consumer disputes... tries to get them to correct their tradeline, but if they fail to do so, you go after them, not the CRA..

-R..