Torin K. Andrews Andrews and Lawrence Law Group LLC.Andrews Law Group LLCNational Recovery and Investigations LLCDebt Assistance Group LLC Illegal Procurement of Consumers' Credit Reports without their Knowledge, Consent or Written Permission Ijamsville MD

I would like to thank the original poster for responding with such a wealth of information.  For a lay-person such as myself, having such information is appreciated.  With that said, I contacted my prior attorney regarding this "permissable purpose" to have a better understanding of what has happened to me personally, as I mentioned in my previous post, the law group noted in the posts above had obtained a judgment against me and had pulled my credit report.  I did not think is was legal but was informed that the permissable purpose was that they represented a judgment creditor.  The original poster in her/his response stated that the information I was given was actually inacurate.  I addressed this with my prior attorney, as I was concerned that he had misinformed me.  This is what my former attorney informed me of:

  "The law is not very clear as to whether of not a judgment creditor can look at your credit report if the underlying debt was not a credit account. Prior to 2003 the FCRA did not define "credit". This allowed judgment creditors on any kind of debt to obtain a judgment debtor's credit report, if they intended to use the report for collections purposes.  Congress then enacted the Fair and Accurate Credit Transaction Act in 2003.  In FACTA, Congress defined "credit as the right granted by a creditor to a debtor to defer payment of debt or incur debts and defer its payment or to purchase property or services and defer payment therefore.  At least one federal court has applied FACTA's definition of credit to a FCRA case. In doing so, the court said that judgment creditors on debts that were not initially credit transactions cannot pull the debtors credit report.  However that is only one federal court, and that one federal court does not decide for all courts.  The matter would need to be heard before a judge and the judge would need to make the determination whether or not they would side with that one federal courts conclusion.

I also emailed the other questions posed by the other poster, to my prior attorney to gain further understanding of the how's and why's of this whole thing.  His response was as follows:

  "Not all credit agencies require that a social security number be provided in order to obtain a persons credit information.  While it is possible for the consumer to restrict information obtained through a credit agency without providing a consumers SSN, it is possible to obtain credit information without having the consumer's SSN. With respect to the underlined portion that you sent to me, it appears whomever posted this is trying to assert an opinion as fact. Where the poster notes "Mr. Andrew's practice of obtaining copies of Defendant's credit reports to collect on money judgments owed to his homeowner and condominium association clients without a court order may not be permissable under the FCRA"etc.  "May not be permissable" does not mean is not permissable, as it would need to be ruled on by a judge in order to be deemed not permissable. Until it is ruled on in a specific case, it is not a fact.  I see this all the time where someone may act as an attorney pro se, and they put in the research in order to represent themselves to the best of their ability, however they are not in fact an attorney, they have not gone to law school and unlike an attorney they tend to recite opinion as though it were fact.  Please review on the Maryland Judiciary Case Search (public record, so you can pull this up on your computer) the following cases, as  they are prime examples of multiple rulings on a case wherein the Defendant was pleading a similar case to what is noted by the poster you quoted in your email to me. Norbeck Grove Comm. Assoc. Inc. vs. Janice Fontell -District Court case number 0601-0023653-2008 Circuit Court case numbers 7947D, 371070V and 117762R.  It is unfortunate and it happens all the time when a Defendant in an HOA case prefers to quote statute in order to avoid paying what is actually due.  I say this not as an HOA attorney, but as an attorney who has seen many cases wherein the Defendant has read and knows the law and would prefer to cheat their association out of the dues their neighbors still have to pay, just because they (the Defendant) want to win to prove a point.  It's a sad state of affairs and I'm glad that in your case you took the high road."

The above in italics is what I received from my former attorney in response to what I sent him from the original poster.  After reading what she/he had posted, I felt confused because it had directly contradicted what I had been told previously by my attorney that I had retained when faced with a similar issue as the poster.  To anyone reading this, I would highly suggest doing as much research as you can on your own, but when it comes to going to court, hire an attorney to go to battle for you.  What's right is right, what's wrong is wrong.  I consider myself to be a good person. I didn't stop paying my HOA dues because I wanted to prove a point (not saying the Defendant my prior attorney mentioned did that) but I stopped paying because my husband left me with the kids and the house and left me in financial ruin.  I let it go by the wayside, but thanks to Gods will, I was able to take a second job and get back on my feet. I guess the one thing anyone reading this can take from this whole post is if you owe someone money, and an attorney is sending you letters saying "pay us or we will sue you" expect that if you don't pay them, they WILL sue you.  I ended up setting up a payment arrangement and I've been paid in full for over a year now and will NOT let that happen again. But if it does, you can bet that I'll set up a new arrangement before it gets to that point again.  It's not my HOA's fault, it's not Mr. Andrews fault, it was my fault.  Can't get mad at someone for doing their job, but there will always be that kind of person that wants to stomp their feet and point fingers at everyone other than themselves.  We have a few of those in my neighborhood lol.  To the original poster, thank you for providing the codes, I was able to look them up myself and after reading them a good 5 times, was able to understand them, but I do agree with my former attorney, that "may not" does not equate to "not".  Thank you!

I Am Not A Lawyer. This Is Not Legal Advice. I Strongly Recommend That You Consult A Lawyer To Determine If Your Legal, Statutory And Privacy Rights Have Been Violated.

1) Did you give your Association and its collections attorney or management agent your social security number before or after you became a member? If not, then how did Mr. Andrews discover your social security number in order to obtain copies of your credit report from a credit bureau?

2) Did you give your Association and its collections attorney or management agent your written permission to obtain copies of your credit report for collection and/or any other purpose before or after you became a member?

3) Do the governing documents, i.e. the declarations, covenants and bylaws for your Association disclose that obtaining copies of homeowners’ credit reports will be used as a collection practice for the nonpayment of dues?

4) Do the governing documents, i.e. the declarations, covenants and bylaws for your Association authorize your implicit, explicit or written consent to the Association and its collections attorney or management agent to obtain your social security number and/or obtain copies of your credit report?

5) Is providing your social security and obtaining copies of your credit report a condition of your membership in your Association? If so, do you have any documents including but not limited to the Association’s declarations, covenants and bylaws to prove this condition?  

I know of a defendant who was sued by Torin Andrews on behalf of a homeowner association to collect unpaid dues allegedly owed by the defendant’s condominium association. When the defendant provided the court with a copy of the canceled check to prove the condominium association had paid the debt in full, the Association’s management agent contradicted the Plaintiff’s actual written evidence submitted to the court and gave false testimony specifying a new fiscal year for the condominium association’s alleged delinquency. On the basis of the management agent’s false testimony, the court entered a money judgment against the defendant.

To my understanding, five (5) days later, on two (2) separate occasions, Mr. Andrews illegally obtained copies of the defendant’s credit report from Experian in violation of the ten (10) days automatic stay of enforcement period under MD Rule 3-632(a) and MD Rule 3-633, which requires an oral examination of the debtor before a Maryland District Court in order to obtain discovery about a debtor’s assets, real property, wages, and bank accounts, etc. Mr. Andrews did not wait the ten (10) days nor did he request that the defendant submit to an oral examination before a Maryland District Court. Mr. Andrews shared the copies of the defendant’s credit report with the Association’s board of directors.

In support of my understanding and comments, the Maryland District Court has published a booklet titled “Post-Judgment Collection. How to Collect Your Judgment in the District Court of Maryland”. You and your lawyer may want to read the booklet to understand the laws and determine if your credit report was illegally obtained in violation of certain laws.  

To my understanding 1) the money judgment was dismissed on appeal because Mr. Andrews had illegally filed the lawsuit after the three (3) years statute of limitations had expired under Maryland Courts & Judicial Procedure Code Annotated Section 5-101, 2) the use of homeowners’ social security numbers and credit reports as part of the defendant’s Association’s collection policy and practices was not disclosed in the declarations, covenants and bylaws, 3) the use of homeowners’ social security numbers and credit reports was not a condition of the defendant or other homeowners membership in the Association, 4) the defendant never gave the Association and its management agent or Mr. Andrews a social security number and/or written consent and permission to obtain and share copies of the credit report for any purpose, 5) the defendant did not initiate any transaction with the Association that would have allowed the Association and Mr. Andrews to obtain copies of the defendant’s credit report for any purpose, 6) the defendant and others in the community had no knowledge that Mr. Andrews and the Association’s board of directors were obtaining copies of homeowners’ credit report for collection purposes and Mr. Andrews’s use of a “trade name” - National Recovery and Investigations, LLC that was not disclosed on any correspondence or communication sent by his law office to homeowners subject to collection actions on behalf of the Association, and 7) the “trade name” National Recovery and Investigations, LLC was not easily traceable to Mr. Andrews or his law firm and was not recorded on his law firm’s website until the illegal collection practice was publicly exposed.

I Am Not A Lawyer. This Is Not Legal Advice. I Strongly Recommend That You Consult A Lawyer To Determine If Your Legal, Statutory And Privacy Rights Have Been Violated.

For information, I have read a report issued by the Federal Trade Commission in July 2011 titled “40 Years of Experience with the Fair Credit Reporting Act. An FTC Staff Report with Summary of Interpretations”, Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”) and Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003, which is an actual amendment to the FCRA.

From what I have read:

Mr. Andrews’s practice of obtaining copies of defendants’ credit reports to collect on money judgments owed to his homeowner and condominium association clients without a court order may not be permissibleunder the FCRA 15 U.S.C. Section 1681b § 604(3) (A) because the unpaid dues and assessments underlying the money judgment and/or homeowner and condominium association members’ obligation to pay assessments and dues do not meet the statutory definition of “credit” and Mr. Andrews’s homeowner and condominium association clientsmay not meet the statutory definition of a “creditor” under the FCRA and Equal Credit Opportunity Act of 1974.

The FCRA 15 U.S.C. Section 1681a § 603(r) (5) states “the terms “credit” and “creditor” have the same meanings as in Section 702 of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act of 1974.

The Equal Credit Opportunity Act 15 U.S.C. Section 1691a § 702 (d) the term ““credit” means the right granted by a creditor to a debtor to defer payment of debt or to incur debts and defer its payment or to purchase property or services and defer payment therefor”. Unpaid dues and assessments do not constitute credit.

The Equal Credit Opportunity Act 15 U.S.C. Section 1691a § 702 (e) defines “creditor” as “any person who regularly extends, renews, or continues credit; any person who regularly arranges for the extension, renewal, or continuation of credit; or any assignee of an original creditor who participates in the decision to extend, renew, or continue credit”. Mr. Andrews’s homeowner and condominium association clients do not extend, renew, or continue credit, arrange for the extension, renewal, or continuation of credit, and/or participates in the decision to extend, renew, or continue credit to their members.

Defendants’ accounts with their homeowner and condominium associations do not meet the statutory definition of an “account” as defined by the FCRA and Electronic Fund Transfer Act.

The FCRA 15 U.S.C. Section 1681a § 603(r) (4) states the terms ““account” and “electronic fund transfer” have the same meanings as in Section 903 of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act”. The Electronic Fund Transfer Act 15 U.S.C. Section1693a § 903 (2) defines the term ““account” as “a demand deposit, savings deposit, or other asset account”, which is not illustrative of the types of accounts homeowners have with Mr. Andrews’s homeowner and condominium association clients.

Mr. Andrews’s practice of obtaining copies of defendants’ credit reports to collect on money judgments owed to his homeowner and condominium association clients without a court order may not be permissible under the FCRA 15 U.S.C. Section 1681b § 604(3) (F) (i) unless the defendants had INITIATED a business transaction with Mr. Andrews’s homeowner and condominium association clients. According to the Federal Trade Commission, “litigation, whether threatened, possible or ongoing, is not a “business transaction” and is not within the “legitimate business need” purpose provided for by section 604 (A)(3)(F)(i).

Mr. Andrews’s practice of obtaining copies of defendants’ credit reports to collect on money judgments owed to his homeowner and condominium association clients without a court order may not be permissible under the FCRA 15 U.S.C. Section 1681b § 604(3) (F) (ii), which creates a permissible purpose for the review an account to determine whether the consumer continues to meet the terms of the account”.

As stated above, the FCRA 15 U.S.C. Section 1681a § 603(r) (4) states the terms ““account” and “electronic fund transfer” have the same meanings as in Section 903 of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act”. The Electronic Fund Transfer Act 15 U.S.C. Section1693a § 903 (2) defines the term ““account” as “a demand deposit, savings deposit, or other asset account”, which is not illustrative of the types of accounts homeowners have with Mr. Andrews’s homeowner and condominium association clients.

Mr. Andrews’s practice of obtaining copies of defendants’ credit reports to collect on money judgments owed to his homeowner and condominium association clients without a court order may not be permissible under the FCRA 15 U.S.C. Section 1681b § 604(3) (F) (ii) because “Section 604(A) (3)(F)(ii) only provides a permissible purpose to banks that have a legitimate business need to consult a current customer’s report in order to determine whether the terms of a consumer’s current non-credit (savings or checking) accounts should be modified…”. Mr. Andrews’s homeowner and condominium association clients are not banks.

I Am Not A Lawyer. This Is Not Legal Advice. I Strongly Recommend That You Consult A Lawyer To Determine If Your Legal, Statutory And Privacy Rights Have Been Violated.

A lawyer can advise you if the federal credit reporting laws under the FCRA and Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003 preempt your state credit reporting laws.

I believe I know who had posted the initial complaint, as I was privy to the complaintants issue with this company and was in her home when she had mentioned her desire to make such a complaint.  Due to the annonamous complaint, I will not address that aspect of this matter.  I have had an account in collections before with this firm.  My credit report was obtained by this firm, but only after they had obtained a judgment against me.  At first i did not know that they could do that, however the "permissable purpose" that is needed for them to pull my report, WAS in fact the judgment that they had against me for their client (my homeowners association). 

That is the issue I have with the initial complanit by "anonamous".  If they have obtained a judgment against you on behalf of their client, and you haven't paid what you owe of made other arrangements, they have every right to obtain a credit report to locate assets to garnish. I don't like it, but it's true.  I cannot reiterate enough that I was MAD when I saw that my credit report was pulled by that company (who according to my research does have a valid collections liscence), but they did not pull my report until after the judgment was entered.  My fault for not paying my bill when it was only a few hundred dollars.