http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en
misc.consumers.frugal-living@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* walking boots-- which are good? - 7 messages, 5 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/52b4735386145e8e?hl=en
* WAL-MART "Promises" Greenhouse Gas Emissions CUTS! In Five Years! You
Believe It? - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/b601ebce7519558f?hl=en
* CB Radio or cell phone? - 4 messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/03b323177d688519?hl=en
* Remember The 'Cramming" Phone Scams? Thanks To Bush's FTC And FCC "Hands-Off
Policy," The Scammers Are Back BIG-TIME! - 4 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/62f80efd26665b57?hl=en
* Thomas Jefferson said. - 4 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/c74931d20377c4df?hl=en
* annual credit report - 4 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/01af494990c9ff67?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: walking boots-- which are good?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/52b4735386145e8e?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 7 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 1 2010 11:01 am
From: PeterC
On Mon, 1 Mar 2010 07:22:38 -0800 (PST), FenlandRunner wrote:
> On 1 Mar, 14:32, bobharvey <roberthar...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>> On 28 Feb, 17:22, "Gordon" <gordonbpar...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Again TOTAL TRIPE! Why bother with extra linings when you don't need them?
>>> As I stated - the ability of goretex linings to breath is restricted by the
>>> ability of the leather to breathe, so why bother with the goretex?
>>> It's a gimmick designed to con punters.
>>
>> I've long thought that myself, and never noticed any significant
>> difference between leather boots with and without gore-tex. �Fabric
>> ones, of course, are a different story.
>>
>> Given that the socks are at least as important when it comes to
>> disposing of perspiration, You'd think that all the sales blurbs on
>> expensive boots would tell you which socks to wear, or at least which
>> they were tested with. �They never mention it.
>>
>> (I go for socks with as much wool and as little man-made fibre as I
>> can find. �I used to wear pure cotton socks inside the wool ones, but
>> can't get them anywhere now.)
>
> RonHill socks, you can't go wrong!
If they're like the Tracksters, they'd keep ones feet cool! My last GF and
I agreed that Tracksters were to keep warmth out - we were less cold in
shorts.
--
Peter.
2x4 - thick plank; 4x4 - two of 'em.
== 2 of 7 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 1 2010 12:16 pm
From: bobharvey
On 1 Mar, 19:01, PeterC <giraffenos....@homecall.co.uk> wrote:
> > RonHill socks, you can't go wrong!
>
> If they're like the Tracksters, they'd keep ones feet cool! My last GF and
> I agreed that Tracksters were to keep warmth out - we were less cold in
> shorts.
we seem to have frightened off our Original Poster. Has anyone seen
hide nor hair of him?
== 3 of 7 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 1 2010 12:22 pm
From: "Gordon"
"bobharvey" <robertharvey@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:c0e01ee9-b0fc-4419-9e48-91956fcca0f2@19g2000yqu.googlegroups.com...
>
> we seem to have frightened off our Original Poster. Has anyone seen
> hide nor hair of him?
Well it HAS been a bit of a mega-thread!
== 4 of 7 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 1 2010 1:02 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
bobharvey wrote
> PeterC <giraffenos....@homecall.co.uk> wrote
>>> RonHill socks, you can't go wrong!
>> If they're like the Tracksters, they'd keep ones feet cool!
>> My last GF and I agreed that Tracksters were to keep
>> warmth out - we were less cold in shorts.
> we seem to have frightened off our Original Poster.
> Has anyone seen hide nor hair of him?
He hanged himself on the first day. Wota wimp.
== 5 of 7 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 1 2010 1:17 pm
From: Dave Hill
On 1 Mar, 21:02, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote:
> bobharvey wrote
>
> > PeterC <giraffenos....@homecall.co.uk> wrote
> >>> RonHill socks, you can't go wrong!
> >> If they're like the Tracksters, they'd keep ones feet cool!
> >> My last GF and I agreed that Tracksters were to keep
> >> warmth out - we were less cold in shorts.
> > we seem to have frightened off our Original Poster.
> > Has anyone seen hide nor hair of him?
>
> He hanged himself on the first day. Wota wimp.
But shouldn't it have been about Gardening boots?
David Hill
== 6 of 7 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 1 2010 1:25 pm
From: bobharvey
On 1 Mar, 21:17, Dave Hill <da...@abacus-nurseries.co.uk> wrote:
> But shouldn't it have been about Gardening boots?
Don't know about you, but walking is the method I use to get from my
house to my garden.
== 7 of 7 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 1 2010 3:39 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
bobharvey wrote
> Dave Hill <da...@abacus-nurseries.co.uk> wrote
>> But shouldn't it have been about Gardening boots?
> Don't know about you, but walking is the method
> I use to get from my house to my garden.
I usually do too, but rarely wear boots, just when I am digging, which isnt often.
I dont even bother with boots when digging up the evening's new potatoes either.
And I wear my walking boots when I do wear boots in the garden too.
==============================================================================
TOPIC: WAL-MART "Promises" Greenhouse Gas Emissions CUTS! In Five Years! You
Believe It?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/b601ebce7519558f?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 1 2010 11:04 am
From: Brian Elfert
Cindy Hamilton <angelicapaganelli@yahoo.com> writes:
>Wal-Mart is famous for beating up on its suppliers until they give WM
>exactly what it wants at the price it wants to pay. That is but one
>of
>the many, many reasons that I don't shop there.
You must not shop at any big box stores because they all beat up suppliers
for the best price.
== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 1 2010 12:13 pm
From: Michael Coburn
On Mon, 01 Mar 2010 10:10:46 -0800, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> On Feb 26, 4:59 pm, OvarianTumor <slipuva...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Yeah, Wal-Mart, whose employee health plan carries a $1,500 annual
>> deductible on top of unaffordably
>> high fees, and whose "401K" contributes a generous $5 per employee
>> biweekly. Wal-Mart, whose average worker doesn't make enough money to
>> support even half a family.
>
> This obviously comes as news to you, but not every job can support a
> family.
> An employer who pays more than the job earns in revenue will be out of
> business.
And I should care about this exactly why???? Tell us the bad things that
will happen to the middle class if Wally World comes to an end.
>> Wal-Mart can't lower gas emissions without the FULL cooperation of its
>> suppliers, without which Wal-Mart can't exist!
>
> Wal-Mart is famous for beating up on its suppliers until they give WM
> exactly what it wants at the price it wants to pay. That is but one of
> the many, many reasons that I don't shop there.
This is especially true for the suppliers of labor.
>> Who is Wal-Mart trying to kid?
>
> I don't know who they're trying to kid, but you're certainly delusional.
When the unemployment rate is as high as it is labor is a slave.
--
"Senate rules don't trump the Constitution" -- http://GreaterVoice.org/60
==============================================================================
TOPIC: CB Radio or cell phone?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/03b323177d688519?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 1 2010 11:37 am
From: "Malcom \"Mal\" Reynolds"
In article
<upSin.2569$jt1.277@newsfe01.iad>,
Ohioguy <none@none.net> wrote:
> We are moving in a couple of weeks, and my wife will have a roughly
> ~22 minute commute, instead of riding the bus. She is worried about
> having car trouble, and says she would like to get a cell phone so that
> she could get a tow truck in an emergency. I guess I don't worry about
> that much, because I always replace the tires & such a lot more often
> than needed - just so I don't have to worry about blowouts & such much.
>
> I had never considered getting a cell phone - when I see people
> constantly answering them in the stores, and airing their private
> conversations, I find myself visualizing little people on leashes.
> Plus, I don't like the idea of another recurring monthly fee. (why I
> don't have cable TV, for instance)
>
> The best deal I've been able to find on a cell phone is a tracphone.
> I actually have one, a Nokia 2600, that I got marked down to $8 at a
> local Kmart. I figured I would use it as a gift for somebody
> eventually, or use it when we took a cross country vacation temporarily
> - something along those lines.
>
> Anyway, I see that Target has a "double minutes for life" card for
> $25, and there are 400 minute, 1 year cards available for it for $100.
> Plus, there are lots of bonus codes out there. Looks like I could get
> 800+ minutes a year for the emergency phone, for $100 a year.
>
> On the other hand, we could get a modern CB radio. It would probably
> be a one time $150 expense, but would have no recurring fees. However,
> I am not certain that something like that would work in the case of a
> breakdown.
>
> Anyone know - would a CB radio work in a pinch to get a tow truck out
> if your car breaks down? I remember playing with a handheld one about
> 10 years ago, but am not sure if they can be depended on in emergencies.
> However, I figured I should look into it, since my wife says she just
> wants the ability to get a tow if the car breaks down. I have no idea
> if CB still has an "emergency" channel, though. If so, I don't know if
> it is regularly monitored.
>
> Anyone have experience with this?
> Thanks!
Worst case is ANY cell phone, even the
ones with absolutely no minutes can
still dial 911, so you can find an old
cell phone with charger that works and
still get service. They may not like it,
but it's as cheap as you can.
If you want her to speak to you (and you
haven't made clear if she is in the
never never or on some freeway, you can
get a t-mobile phone with $25 worth of
minutes for about $20 (check
fatwallet.com for deals) and I just got
1000 minutes good for a year at a
nominal price of $100 but available with
the help of fatwallet for approximately
a 15% discount.
--
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur
adipiscing elit. Cras lobortis volutpat
commodo. Morbi lobortis, massa fringilla
adipiscing suscipit, velit urna pharetra
neque, non luctus arcu diam vitae justo.
Vivamus lacinia scelerisque ultricies.
Nunc lobortis elit ligula. Aliquam
sollicitudin nunc sed est gravida ac
viverra tellus ullamcorper. Vivamus non
nisi suscipit nisi egestas venenatis.
Donec vitae arcu id urna euismod
feugiat. Vivamus porta lobortis
ultricies. Nulla adipiscing tellus a
neque vehicula porta. Maecenas volutpat
aliquet sagittis. Proin nisi magna,
molestie id volutpat in, tincidunt sed
dolor. Nullam nisi erat, aliquet
scelerisque sagittis vitae, pretium
accumsan odio. Sed ut mi iaculis eros
rutrum tristique ut nec mi. Aliquam nec
augue dui, in mattis urna. In pretium
metus eu diam blandit accumsan. Ut eu
lorem sed odio porttitor blandit.
== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 1 2010 2:10 pm
From: "Annie Woughman"
"Ohioguy" <none@none.net> wrote in message
news:upSin.2569$jt1.277@newsfe01.iad...
> We are moving in a couple of weeks, and my wife will have a roughly ~22
> minute commute, instead of riding the bus. She is worried about having
> car trouble, and says she would like to get a cell phone so that she could
> get a tow truck in an emergency. I guess I don't worry about that much,
> because I always replace the tires & such a lot more often than needed -
> just so I don't have to worry about blowouts & such much.
> Anyone know - would a CB radio work in a pinch to get a tow truck out if
> your car breaks down? I remember playing with a handheld one about 10
> years ago, but am not sure if they can be depended on in emergencies.
> However, I figured I should look into it, since my wife says she just
> wants the ability to get a tow if the car breaks down. I have no idea if
> CB still has an "emergency" channel, though. If so, I don't know if it is
> regularly monitored.
>
> Anyone have experience with this?
> Thanks!
A CB radio would also let any creep listening in the area know that a woman
is stranded alone. With a cell phone she can call who she knows and trusts
to come help her.
== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 1 2010 3:25 pm
From: "terrable"
"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:4b8bf822$0$1644$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> Ohioguy wrote:
>
>> Anyway, I see that Target has a "double minutes for life" card for $25,
>> and there are 400 minute, 1 year cards available for it for $100. Plus,
>> there are lots of bonus codes out there. Looks like I could get 800+
>> minutes a year for the emergency phone, for $100 a year.
>
> PagePlus (Verizon MVNO) has much lower recurring costs than Tracfone.
> Cheaper minutes than even the double minutes for life on Tracfone, lower
> yearly minimum ($10 every 120 days) and far better coverage.
Yes, PagePlus is the way to go.
Buy a Verizon compatible cell phone cheap on ebay or elsewhere and buy
PagePlus activation on ebay for $1.00 (with free $6.00 talk credit).
You just have to mark your calendar to add $10 to the phone every 120 days.
Can't beat $30 a year for cell phone service for minimal use.
== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 1 2010 3:32 pm
From: Balvenieman
Ohioguy <none@none.net> wrote:
>She is worried about
>having car trouble, and says she would like to get a cell phone so that
>she could get a tow truck in an emergency
DW&I have cell phones for just such cases. Secondhand phones that
work on Verizon, copped cheap on eBay years back, and service with
PagePlus. $10.00/120 days='way more minutes than I use; they "rollover"
with timely recharging. I can buy new minutes at circle K, independent
convenience stores, local agents or eBay. We don't even turn them on
except to make a call. I use it as a convenient list-checker from the
grocery store. That's just about our cell phones' only regular use but
they were critical in maintaining close tabs on an ill family member a
few years back.
In the past, someone has mentioned her non-expiring Tracfone
minutes that, IIRC, required a $100 buy. That might be worth looking
into, too.
But then, again, there's always this to consider:
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x5odhh_pop-corn-t%C3%A9l%C3%A9phone-portable-micro-o_news
--
the Balvenieman
Running on single malt in U.S.A.
USDA zone 9b
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Remember The 'Cramming" Phone Scams? Thanks To Bush's FTC And FCC "
Hands-Off Policy," The Scammers Are Back BIG-TIME!
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/62f80efd26665b57?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 1 2010 11:56 am
From: "Jesus'sPedoBoy"
Neither the Federal Trade Commission Or The Federal Communications
Commission claim any oversight responsibility!
So they play one off against the other! Another instance of broken
government.
Of course, this problem is another holdover from the BUSH
ADMINISTRATION. Those crooks instructed both the FTC and the FCC to go
easy on phone crammers so as not to ruffle the feathers of the BIG
PHONE FIRMS, which ultimately share in the profits.
As a phone user, they only urge YOU to pay the bills.
Please, no questions, please.
-----------------------
"Misdials help 'crammers' ring up millions in phone bill scam"
By David Cho
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, March 1, 2010; A17
ROY and JOHN LIN *** made a devilish fortune in the details of phone
bills, according to a federal investigation.
The San Francisco brothers hired overseas telemarketers to offer
directory assistance and other services to small businesses and
ordinary Americans, according to a major case to be unveiled this week
by the Federal Trade Commission. But their real goal was to sneak
small, unauthorized fees onto thousands of monthly bills and hope the
charges would go unnoticed, court documents state.
The scheme, known as "cramming," proved to be a boon, the documents
show. The Lins' alleged take: $19 million over five years.
The Lins are among a resurgent wave of crammers who may be ensnaring
millions of Americans, federal officials and consumer advocates say. A
decade ago, the scam was so widespread that it became one of the most
profitable business lines of the Gambino crime family.
A wave of federal and state crackdowns pushed the crime into
remission. But as phone bills, both conventional and cellular, have
become more complex, crammers are making a comeback by using
sophisticated marketing techniques and by launching their schemes from
overseas to try to escape the purview of U.S. regulators.
Some firms act with such speed that it can be tough for state and
federal investigators as well as consumer advocates to keep pace.
Earlier this month, Toyota released a toll-free phone number for its
massive car recall. The next day, a Detroit-based wire service printed
the phone number with an incorrect digit. By then, a crammer had
already set up a scam. Consumers who dialed the wrong number were
asked by an unidentified voice to hand over their personal
information, such as their social security number, and for permission
to add a $4.95 charge to their phone bill.
Unless they realized they had misdialed, many of the consumers might
have thought they had reached a Toyota official rather than a crammer,
said Cindy Dudley, director of business services for the Better
Business Bureau in Fresno, Calif., which uncovered the case.
Crammers rely on other firms. Companies called billing aggregators
help them get the charges on bills. And the big phone companies look
the other way, consumer advocates say. Each of these participants
takes a slice of the revenues.
Edmund Mierzwinski, consumer program director for U.S. Public Interest
Research Groups, said the phone companies could stop the practice if
they wanted to. "These fly-by-night companies are out there and the
telephone companies are happy to take their money," he said."that some
third-party charges that appear on phone bills are legitimate.
"When we get complaints about particular providers, we've been
vigilant," said Susan Cavender Butta, a spokeswoman for Verizon. "And
if we've seen an excessive number of complaints, we'll take action to
terminate that contract."
Crammers typically reserve toll-free phone numbers that are very
similar to frequently used customer-service numbers of agencies such
as the Internal Revenue Service or the Social Security Administration.
Customers are made to think they had reached the right number and then
are tricked into accepting a charge on their phone bill. For example,
some crammers will send cellular callers what appears to be an
innocent text message and ask them to reply. The crammers then bring
that reply text to the phone companies as proof that the customer has
agreed to be billed every month.
The Lins often didn't even bother to get the approval of customers,
according to FTC documents.
Using a series of company names including Inc21, GlobalYP and
Gofaxer.com, the Lins purported to sell Web site hosting, Internet
yellow pages listings, search engine advertising and other services to
small businesses and consumers. The telemarketers greeted potential
customers by stating that they sought to "verify and update business
information," without making it clear that they were seeking to add
charges to their phone bills, the documents said. In many cases, Inc21
doctored tapes of the calls to make it seem like the customers had
agreed to be billed.
The FTC persuaded a U.S. district judge in California to force the
Lins as well as Pacific Bell, the telephone company that received
proceeds from the scam, to return the money to nearly 11,000
customers. In his opinion supporting the preliminary injunction, the
judge noted that the action "highlights the vulnerable underbelly of a
widespread and under-regulated practice" of telephone billing.
Added Lois C. Greisman, the FTC's head of the Division of Marketing
Practices: Cramming "causes significant economic injury to consumers.
People need to read their phone bills, whether conventional or mobile
and any bundled bills to look for any unidentified charges."
*** The Lins did not return messages sent to the e-mail address of
their company. The phone number listed on the company's Web site did
not appear to be working.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/28/AR2010022803750.html
== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 1 2010 12:11 pm
From: Bert Hyman
In
news:70d06455-869d-4dd8-bd89-d73b6e69edeb@g26g2000yqn.googlegroups.com
"Jesus'sPedoBoy" <jismquiff@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Of course, this problem is another holdover from the BUSH
> ADMINISTRATION. Those crooks instructed both the FTC and the FCC to go
> easy on phone crammers
The regulations either exist or they don't, regardless of what anybody
from any administration might have "instructed" any agency.
So, what regulations are being violated, and what agency is actually
responsible for enforcing them?
But wait... In your own post you say
" ... according to a major case to be unveiled this week
by the Federal Trade Commission."
That certainly sounds like the FTC is actually doing something; what's
your problem, exactly?
--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN bert@iphouse.com
== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 1 2010 1:07 pm
From: "God'sLittleAnus"
On Mar 1, 3:11 pm, Bert Hyman <b...@iphouse.com> wrote:
But wait... In your own post you say
" ... according to a major case to be unveiled this week
by the Federal Trade Commission."
That certainly sounds like the FTC is actually doing something;
what's
your problem, exactly?
--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN b...@iphouse.com
========
Hymie,
I believe the poster's inference is that now OBAMA's your president,
the federal organizations that the Bushies hobbled are, after 8 years,
being put to work on programs for which our tax dollars were intended.
Hymie -- are you possibly becoming demented? Hearing "sounds" and
things? Maybe you need a posting time-out.
== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 1 2010 1:45 pm
From: Bert Hyman
In news:85feb3b8-3de6-49c8-ac43-ff89e2fa3feb@f8g2000yqn.googlegroups.com
"God'sLittleAnus" <perryneheum@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I believe the poster's inference
But we know that you'll believe anything.
--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN bert@iphouse.com
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Thomas Jefferson said.
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/c74931d20377c4df?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 1 2010 12:36 pm
From: VFW
"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties
than standing armies"
deja vu?
--
Money; What a Concept !
== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 1 2010 1:03 pm
From: "Rod Speed"
VFW wrote:
> "I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies"
From the fool that keep slaves.
> deja vu?
Nope, just another massive brain fart from that fool.
== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 1 2010 2:13 pm
From: George
On 3/1/2010 3:36 PM, VFW wrote:
> "I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties
> than standing armies"
> deja vu?
Only if they become big and powerful enough to buy enough politicians so
that they can do whatever they want and the hired help will reach into
everyone's pockets to cover their gambling losses. Oh wait...
== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 1 2010 5:50 pm
From: VFW
In article <7v2od8F8dgU1@mid.individual.net>,
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
> VFW wrote:
>
> > "I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties
> > than standing armies"
>
> From the fool that keep slaves.
>
> > deja vu?
>
> Nope, just another massive brain fart from that fool.
"Kill the Messenger" never gets old. ;)
--
Money; What a Concept !
==============================================================================
TOPIC: annual credit report
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/01af494990c9ff67?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 1 2010 1:07 pm
From: "Annie Woughman"
Has anyone else had trouble getting their free annual credit report
online from Equifax? For two years in a row now when I go to
annualcreditreport.com, I have no problem viewing and printing my report
from TransUnion or Experian but Equifax always says that it cannot give me
my report online at this time but I can request one by mail. It does that
to my husband too. In the FAQ section it says this might be because we have
a freeze on our credit reports or that we supplied inaccurate information.
This is not the case for either of us. I am wondering if it is a ruse to
get people to buy their credit scores ($7.95) or sign up for their credit
protection stuff. The first year this happened I did have them send it by
mail (which in my opinion is much riskier than just having a look at it on
line) but I refused to do it this time because I don't want all that
information going through the mail.
== 2 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 1 2010 1:56 pm
From: "rtandems@yahoo.com"
I used annualcreditreport.com earlier this year and got all three
reports with no issues.
-Brian
== 3 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 1 2010 2:04 pm
From: "Annie Woughman"
<rtandems@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:2a016ff7-77c1-4b7d-b27c-e93eecc0c480@g28g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
> I used annualcreditreport.com earlier this year and got all three
> reports with no issues.
>
> -Brian
Hmmm. I wish they had a phone number that would actually let you talk to a
live person. I would like to get that fixed. The first year we used it we
too got all three with no problem. It has just been the last two years.
The only thing that we have done is opt out of the constant bombardment of
credit card offers--that shouldn't keep us from getting our
report--especially since it is only one of the three that we are having a
problem with.
== 4 of 4 ==
Date: Mon, Mar 1 2010 2:30 pm
From: SMS
Annie Woughman wrote:
> Has anyone else had trouble getting their free annual credit report
> online from Equifax? For two years in a row now when I go to
> annualcreditreport.com, I have no problem viewing and printing my report
> from TransUnion or Experian but Equifax always says that it cannot give
> me my report online at this time but I can request one by mail. It does
> that to my husband too. In the FAQ section it says this might be
> because we have a freeze on our credit reports or that we supplied
> inaccurate information. This is not the case for either of us. I am
> wondering if it is a ruse to get people to buy their credit scores
> ($7.95) or sign up for their credit protection stuff. The first year
> this happened I did have them send it by mail (which in my opinion is
> much riskier than just having a look at it on line) but I refused to do
> it this time because I don't want all that information going through the
> mail.
Just apply for a mortgage loan, get turned down, and you'll get all
three credit reports, along with FICO scores, for free.
I'm refinancing, my wife and I both have credit scores in the 790-800
range, a very low LTV, no credit card debt, no car loans, low
debt/income ratio and one bank turned us down. So I can get all six
credit reports for free now, and another bank was happy to do the loan.
==============================================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "misc.consumers.frugal-living"
group.
To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to misc.consumers.frugal-living+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/subscribe?hl=en
To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com
==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en
No comments:
Post a Comment