This is one strategy that attorney's charge $1,500 or more for. It is the technique that removes any public record from your credit report, in a legal fashion.
As with any form of credit restoration, there is the process of challenging the listing for validity and requesting documentation that the debt exists. The way to remove public records is to challenge individual items, such as date discharged, amount, date of last activity etc. Dispute the individual information contained in the public record as being incomplete.
If there is nothing missing, first dispute the entire listing. If the report comes back as verified, then request the "method of verification".
As stated in the Fair Credit Reporting Act:
15 U.S.C section 1681 (i)(7): "Description of reinvestigative procedure. A consumer reporting agency shall provide to a consumer a description referred to in paragraph (6)(B)(iii)by not later than 15 days after receiving a request from a consumer for that description."
(6)(B)(iii)"...a description of the procedure used to determine accuracy and completeness of the information shall be provided to the consumer by the agency, including the business name and address of the furnisher of information contacted in connection with such information and the telephone number of such furnisher
The credit bureaus rarely provide the furnishers contact information because they don't want the consumer to realize that in most cases all they're doing is a computer verification and not a verbal one. When this information is not given in a resonable and timely manner, pressure can then be put on the credit reporting agency to delete the account.
The main thing to point out here is PROCEDURE. The CRA must follow procedure as set forth in the law.
15 U.S.C. section 168 (e): Accuracy of report. Whenever a consumer reporting agency prepares a consumer report it shall follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information concerning the individual about whom the report relates
Friday, December 12, 2008
Sunday, December 7, 2008
Why I stopped Shopping at Amazon.com
Why I stopped shopping at Amazon.com:
A reading expert sounds off...
I've shopped at Amazon.com for several years. But I decided to quit shopping there because of:
1) Their new privacy notice. The revised notice (not a "policy") states that they gather information about consumers every time they search for a product. That means to me that they've developed a profile on me based not only on what I buy, but what I'm looking for. I don't want them to know that much about me.
It may only be a matter of semantics, but according to the Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary (2000) a "policy" is a procedure based on material interest, or a course of action used to guide decisions, while a "notice" is more of a warning or announcement. What does it mean for consumers to be protected by a privacy notice instead of a privacy policy?
2) Difficulty in canceling my account. How do you cancel your online account at Amazon.com? You can enter your account to make any changes, but I didn't see any way to cancel an account. When I e-mailed them about canceling my account, here's the response I received:
Customer privacy is an issue we take very seriously. Please rest assured that Amazon.com is *not* in the business of selling customer information.
We have developed, and may continue to develop, business relationships and co-branded sites with other online companies (such as Greenlight and toysrus.com). We will make it clear when an affiliated merchant is involved in any transaction you may make via our web site.
If you would prefer not to share your personal information with an affiliated merchant, you may always choose not to shop with that merchant. In either event, because the customer information shared with these jointly owned or co-branded businesses is limited to information regarding your transactions with those merchants, information about your other purchases at Amazon.com (such as books and music) will never be shared with any jointly owned or co-branded business without your consent.
Please note that it is fairly easy to tell when you are dealing with an affiliated merchant, and we do not share your information with non-affiliated third parties (i.e., direct marketers and spammers).
In the unlikely event that Amazon.com Inc., or substantially all of its assets are acquired, customer information may be one of the transferred assets, just as with a bank or other physical store that keeps customer records.
I hope this has addressed your concerns about our Privacy Notice. If you wish to close your account, however, please write back to us at account-close@amazon.com and we will do so.
Please note that we cannot totally remove account information from our system, as it is part of our business transaction records. (Italics added.)
Please feel free to write back to us if you have any further questions or concerns. Thank you for shopping at Amazon.com.
Best regards,
Nathan H.
Amazon.com
Earth's Biggest Selection
http://www.amazon.com
So they own my account information--forever. Note that the web page does not tell you how to cancel your account. I only found out from their e-mail. They make it easy to become customer, but almost impossible to become an ex-customer.
3) Dynamic pricing. Amazon.com recently got caught charging different customers different amounts for the same product. They claimed it was a marketing experiment (which would not be repeated) but I'm not sure I believe them. How do you know if the price you're being charged is the only price for the product you're buying? Maybe some consumers pay more, some less. There's no way for you to know.
4) Conditions of use. According to Amazon.com's "Conditions of Use" --
Confirming Price and Availability
We cannot confirm the price of an item until you order, but please note that we do NOT charge your credit card until the date we ship your order to you.
Despite our best efforts, a small number of the more than 4.7 million items in our catalog are mispriced. Rest assured, however, that we verify prices as part of our shipping procedures.
If an item's correct price is lower than our stated price, we charge the lower amount and ship you the item.
If an item's correct price is higher than our stated price, we contact you for instructions before shipping.
After we have received your order, we will also inform you by e-mail if any items in your order prove to be unavailable.
Given their experiment with dynamic pricing, just what is their "correct price?" How does dynamic pricing (which they say they're not doing any more) fit with their conditions of use?
With all the articles written about Amazon.com's privacy notice, nothing has been written about their "Conditions of Use"--which is written at a 3rd-4th year college reading level. Based on 1998 census data, about 24% of adults have a bachelor's degree or more. Since literacy researchers know that people often read several grades lower than their highest level of educational attainment, it is clear that most consumers will have a hard time understanding those "Conditions."
As unreadable as many privacy policies are, I suspect that Terms of Use/Conditions of Use are even more complicated and legalistic. Maybe that's why columnists and privacy advocates haven't taken as close a look at them as they have privacy policies. Yet the two are linked.
My "readability analysis" of Amazon.com's "Conditions of Use" shows that it's a hard document to understand because it has too many long and complicated sentences, and too many big and unfamiliar words. The writing style is weak, and does not meet plain English criteria.
Readability Statistics Amazon.com's
Conditions of Use
Based on 57 sentences
I. DOCUMENT STYLE ANALYSIS
a) Reading Ease Difficult
b) Human Interest Interesting
c) Reading Grade Level
[24% of adults have a college degree]
Grade 15-16 (3rd-4th year college)
d) Overall Writing Style Weak
e) Plain English Grade D (62%)
II. SENTENCE ANALYSIS
a) Words per sentence 28 [15-20 is best]
b) Active voice sentences 52% [60% is best]
c) % Simple & Normal Sentences 53% [80% is best]
d) % Wordy, pompous & complicated sentences 47% [20% is best]
e) Sentences written at grade 16-20
47% [5% is best]
III. WORD ANALYSIS
a) Syllables per word 1.7 [1.5 is best]
b) Big words (more than 2 syllables) 21% [10% is best]
c) Text Statistics
< 1450 = common words
1450 = normal words
> 1450 = uncommon words 3,652
5) Privacy certification. Many online sites have TRUSTe certification, although Amazon.com is not one of them. In fact, Amazon.com does not have any privacy certification on their web site at all!
As a general observation, the TRUSTe "Site Coordinator's Guide" identifies "Readability" as one of "Truste's Required Guidelines." That guideline states that "The privacy statement must be easy to read and understand. Use language that will not confuse or frustrate users. We suggest writing at an eighth grade level without any legal jargon."
I have not seen any privacy policies written at an eighth grade reading level, even those at web sites with TRUSTe certification. I emailed TRUSTe about this contradiction, but did not receive a reply. What good is a privacy policy if people can't understand it?
I don't like Amazon.com's privacy notice, the impossibility of truly canceling my account, a potentially contradictory pricing strategy, complicated and confusing "conditions of use" and a total lack of privacy certification.
I'm taking my business elsewhere.
A biography of the author:
Mark Hochhauser, Ph.D., researches, writes, and consults on the readability of written information.
The online version of the article does not contain the chart with that data; contact Mark for more information.
Mark Hochhauser, Ph.D.
Readability Consulting
3344 Scott Avenue North
Golden Valley, MN 55422
Phone: (763) 521-4672
Fax: (763) 521-5069
E-mail: MarkH38514@aol.com
A reading expert sounds off...
I've shopped at Amazon.com for several years. But I decided to quit shopping there because of:
1) Their new privacy notice. The revised notice (not a "policy") states that they gather information about consumers every time they search for a product. That means to me that they've developed a profile on me based not only on what I buy, but what I'm looking for. I don't want them to know that much about me.
It may only be a matter of semantics, but according to the Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary (2000) a "policy" is a procedure based on material interest, or a course of action used to guide decisions, while a "notice" is more of a warning or announcement. What does it mean for consumers to be protected by a privacy notice instead of a privacy policy?
2) Difficulty in canceling my account. How do you cancel your online account at Amazon.com? You can enter your account to make any changes, but I didn't see any way to cancel an account. When I e-mailed them about canceling my account, here's the response I received:
Customer privacy is an issue we take very seriously. Please rest assured that Amazon.com is *not* in the business of selling customer information.
We have developed, and may continue to develop, business relationships and co-branded sites with other online companies (such as Greenlight and toysrus.com). We will make it clear when an affiliated merchant is involved in any transaction you may make via our web site.
If you would prefer not to share your personal information with an affiliated merchant, you may always choose not to shop with that merchant. In either event, because the customer information shared with these jointly owned or co-branded businesses is limited to information regarding your transactions with those merchants, information about your other purchases at Amazon.com (such as books and music) will never be shared with any jointly owned or co-branded business without your consent.
Please note that it is fairly easy to tell when you are dealing with an affiliated merchant, and we do not share your information with non-affiliated third parties (i.e., direct marketers and spammers).
In the unlikely event that Amazon.com Inc., or substantially all of its assets are acquired, customer information may be one of the transferred assets, just as with a bank or other physical store that keeps customer records.
I hope this has addressed your concerns about our Privacy Notice. If you wish to close your account, however, please write back to us at account-close@amazon.com and we will do so.
Please note that we cannot totally remove account information from our system, as it is part of our business transaction records. (Italics added.)
Please feel free to write back to us if you have any further questions or concerns. Thank you for shopping at Amazon.com.
Best regards,
Nathan H.
Amazon.com
Earth's Biggest Selection
http://www.amazon.com
So they own my account information--forever. Note that the web page does not tell you how to cancel your account. I only found out from their e-mail. They make it easy to become customer, but almost impossible to become an ex-customer.
3) Dynamic pricing. Amazon.com recently got caught charging different customers different amounts for the same product. They claimed it was a marketing experiment (which would not be repeated) but I'm not sure I believe them. How do you know if the price you're being charged is the only price for the product you're buying? Maybe some consumers pay more, some less. There's no way for you to know.
4) Conditions of use. According to Amazon.com's "Conditions of Use" --
Confirming Price and Availability
We cannot confirm the price of an item until you order, but please note that we do NOT charge your credit card until the date we ship your order to you.
Despite our best efforts, a small number of the more than 4.7 million items in our catalog are mispriced. Rest assured, however, that we verify prices as part of our shipping procedures.
If an item's correct price is lower than our stated price, we charge the lower amount and ship you the item.
If an item's correct price is higher than our stated price, we contact you for instructions before shipping.
After we have received your order, we will also inform you by e-mail if any items in your order prove to be unavailable.
Given their experiment with dynamic pricing, just what is their "correct price?" How does dynamic pricing (which they say they're not doing any more) fit with their conditions of use?
With all the articles written about Amazon.com's privacy notice, nothing has been written about their "Conditions of Use"--which is written at a 3rd-4th year college reading level. Based on 1998 census data, about 24% of adults have a bachelor's degree or more. Since literacy researchers know that people often read several grades lower than their highest level of educational attainment, it is clear that most consumers will have a hard time understanding those "Conditions."
As unreadable as many privacy policies are, I suspect that Terms of Use/Conditions of Use are even more complicated and legalistic. Maybe that's why columnists and privacy advocates haven't taken as close a look at them as they have privacy policies. Yet the two are linked.
My "readability analysis" of Amazon.com's "Conditions of Use" shows that it's a hard document to understand because it has too many long and complicated sentences, and too many big and unfamiliar words. The writing style is weak, and does not meet plain English criteria.
Readability Statistics Amazon.com's
Conditions of Use
Based on 57 sentences
I. DOCUMENT STYLE ANALYSIS
a) Reading Ease Difficult
b) Human Interest Interesting
c) Reading Grade Level
[24% of adults have a college degree]
Grade 15-16 (3rd-4th year college)
d) Overall Writing Style Weak
e) Plain English Grade D (62%)
II. SENTENCE ANALYSIS
a) Words per sentence 28 [15-20 is best]
b) Active voice sentences 52% [60% is best]
c) % Simple & Normal Sentences 53% [80% is best]
d) % Wordy, pompous & complicated sentences 47% [20% is best]
e) Sentences written at grade 16-20
47% [5% is best]
III. WORD ANALYSIS
a) Syllables per word 1.7 [1.5 is best]
b) Big words (more than 2 syllables) 21% [10% is best]
c) Text Statistics
< 1450 = common words
1450 = normal words
> 1450 = uncommon words 3,652
5) Privacy certification. Many online sites have TRUSTe certification, although Amazon.com is not one of them. In fact, Amazon.com does not have any privacy certification on their web site at all!
As a general observation, the TRUSTe "Site Coordinator's Guide" identifies "Readability" as one of "Truste's Required Guidelines." That guideline states that "The privacy statement must be easy to read and understand. Use language that will not confuse or frustrate users. We suggest writing at an eighth grade level without any legal jargon."
I have not seen any privacy policies written at an eighth grade reading level, even those at web sites with TRUSTe certification. I emailed TRUSTe about this contradiction, but did not receive a reply. What good is a privacy policy if people can't understand it?
I don't like Amazon.com's privacy notice, the impossibility of truly canceling my account, a potentially contradictory pricing strategy, complicated and confusing "conditions of use" and a total lack of privacy certification.
I'm taking my business elsewhere.
A biography of the author:
Mark Hochhauser, Ph.D., researches, writes, and consults on the readability of written information.
The online version of the article does not contain the chart with that data; contact Mark for more information.
Mark Hochhauser, Ph.D.
Readability Consulting
3344 Scott Avenue North
Golden Valley, MN 55422
Phone: (763) 521-4672
Fax: (763) 521-5069
E-mail: MarkH38514@aol.com
Private Internet Searches
Keep Your Internet Searches Private
Internet users were shocked to learn that the search queries of over 600,000 individuals were exposed online by AOL recently. Although the personal names of AOL users had been replaced with numbers, apparently for a research project, reporters and others were able to determine the identities of several people. Search terms revealed medical conditions, illegal activities, illicit interests, financial information, even Social Security numbers.
The retention of search logs is a common practice of search engine companies, not only AOL, but also the other major services such as Google, MSN, Ask, and Yahoo. But a little-known search engine has made a name for itself by bucking the trend.
Ixquick, a search engine based in the Netherlands, promises it will permanently delete all users’ personal search details from its log files. With this privacy policy, established in June 2006, Ixquick stands heads taller than its peers. www.ixquick.com
To date, the other search engines store users’ search details for at least some time. Google, which is preferred by just under half of all users, stores search data indefinitely. Other popular search engines, including MSN, Ask, and Yahoo also have policies indicating that they store user data for an undefined period of time.
When AOL released Internet search histories, the public realized that the search terms entered could tell a lot about the searcher. At least two user’s identities were revealed through search terms alone. The Washington Post reports that at least 190 users had entered their Social Security number into AOL’s search engine.
Ixquick will delete a user’s IP address and has designed a cookie that will not identify an individual user. It says deletes all personal information within 48 hours.
Switching to Ixquick does not mean you have to give up the other search engines. Ixquick is a metasearch engine, which means that it returns the top-ten results from multiple other search engines. It uses a star system to rank its results -- by awarding one star for every result that has been returned from another search engine. Thereby, the top search results are the ones that have been returned from the maximum number of search engines.
The AOL situation is just the latest example of why data retention policies are a privacy risk for consumers. In December 2005, the U.S. government wanted data to support its proposed child pornography law. To get the necessary data, the government issued subpoenas to Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, and AOL asking for search histories and IP addresses. Google fought the subpoena, but eventually had to turn over Web site addresses that were returned by searches.
At the time, the other search engines, which complied with the subpoena, claimed that no personal information was released by handing over the search histories to the government. The recent AOL incident shows how empty those statements were.
What’s the lesson to be learned from this privacy meltdown? Relying on a search engine’s promise not to reveal your information may not protect your personal information. The best solution is to use online services that minimize data retention. If a search engine has no data, then a subpoena for personal search information is useless.
You can search the Internet in private at www.ixquick.com
At least two complaints have been filed with the Federal Trade Commission about AOL’s disclosure of search terms:
1. Complaint of the World Privacy Forum (WPF), www.worldprivacyforum.org/pdf/WPF_FTCcomplaint8162006fswp.pdf
2. Complaint of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, www.eff.org/Privacy/AOL/aol_ftc_complaint_final.pdf
For tips on search engine privacy, read the WPF’s guide: www.worldprivacyforum.org/searchengineprivacytips.html.
Internet users were shocked to learn that the search queries of over 600,000 individuals were exposed online by AOL recently. Although the personal names of AOL users had been replaced with numbers, apparently for a research project, reporters and others were able to determine the identities of several people. Search terms revealed medical conditions, illegal activities, illicit interests, financial information, even Social Security numbers.
The retention of search logs is a common practice of search engine companies, not only AOL, but also the other major services such as Google, MSN, Ask, and Yahoo. But a little-known search engine has made a name for itself by bucking the trend.
Ixquick, a search engine based in the Netherlands, promises it will permanently delete all users’ personal search details from its log files. With this privacy policy, established in June 2006, Ixquick stands heads taller than its peers. www.ixquick.com
To date, the other search engines store users’ search details for at least some time. Google, which is preferred by just under half of all users, stores search data indefinitely. Other popular search engines, including MSN, Ask, and Yahoo also have policies indicating that they store user data for an undefined period of time.
When AOL released Internet search histories, the public realized that the search terms entered could tell a lot about the searcher. At least two user’s identities were revealed through search terms alone. The Washington Post reports that at least 190 users had entered their Social Security number into AOL’s search engine.
Ixquick will delete a user’s IP address and has designed a cookie that will not identify an individual user. It says deletes all personal information within 48 hours.
Switching to Ixquick does not mean you have to give up the other search engines. Ixquick is a metasearch engine, which means that it returns the top-ten results from multiple other search engines. It uses a star system to rank its results -- by awarding one star for every result that has been returned from another search engine. Thereby, the top search results are the ones that have been returned from the maximum number of search engines.
The AOL situation is just the latest example of why data retention policies are a privacy risk for consumers. In December 2005, the U.S. government wanted data to support its proposed child pornography law. To get the necessary data, the government issued subpoenas to Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, and AOL asking for search histories and IP addresses. Google fought the subpoena, but eventually had to turn over Web site addresses that were returned by searches.
At the time, the other search engines, which complied with the subpoena, claimed that no personal information was released by handing over the search histories to the government. The recent AOL incident shows how empty those statements were.
What’s the lesson to be learned from this privacy meltdown? Relying on a search engine’s promise not to reveal your information may not protect your personal information. The best solution is to use online services that minimize data retention. If a search engine has no data, then a subpoena for personal search information is useless.
You can search the Internet in private at www.ixquick.com
At least two complaints have been filed with the Federal Trade Commission about AOL’s disclosure of search terms:
1. Complaint of the World Privacy Forum (WPF), www.worldprivacyforum.org/pdf/WPF_FTCcomplaint8162006fswp.pdf
2. Complaint of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, www.eff.org/Privacy/AOL/aol_ftc_complaint_final.pdf
For tips on search engine privacy, read the WPF’s guide: www.worldprivacyforum.org/searchengineprivacytips.html.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)