TLO Hammers Down

Did you survive the cut?

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Share on StumbleUponShare on RedditEmail this to someone

If you’re a Google, Yahoo, or LinkedIn investigation group subscriber then you’ve probably heard the latest TLO commotion from the most recent slew of banned users. They’re discussing how an audit was imposed upon them and a new walk through of their office space¬†was done to ensure security compliance was maintained.

TLO has already been fading from its favor with the diminishing quality of data. A noticeable decline since its adored founder, Hank Asher, died suddenly slamming the database into a downward spiral and into bankruptcy resulting in a forced sale to TransUnion.

One customer who lost his access had some good information that he shared about the experience along with his own opinion and, because TLO is a sponsor of that association, the group moderator began censoring the members from participating in the discussion and blocked the thread from new posts in addition to unethically demanding that no more discussion of the situation be posted. Can you believe that?

I can’t decide which is more unreasonable. The moderator’s decision to censor a former law enforcement officer and licensed private investigator from discussing his personal experience or TLO banning him for not having a door on his home office space. Which, obviously, had already been approved.

In October of 2015 I posted an image of a short message that I wanted to get out to my Twitter audience which tells about TLO subscribers losing access devoid of any explanation. Investigators using Vehicle Sightings to search license plate numbers which are also out for repossession, were instantly banned.

The reason being that they assume an investigator was asked to run the plate for a repossessor who would pay hundreds of dollars for the same information over the minimal $25 fee an investigator pays. Apparently this is a contractual obligation between the powerful DRN data provider, Vigilant Solutions, and TLO.

My opinion was a simple and straightforward one. Any person who an investigator would be looking for, would also fall into the realm of being out for repossession, wanted by the police, sought after for back child support, or even the subject of a theft investigation.

Since that tweet, I’ve heard that precautionary measures were placed which restricts the inclusion of any vehicle location information from the TLO database if the auto is also out for repossession and listed with any of Vigilant Solutions’ products.

Reading between the lines this means that if someone is absconding and also out for repossession then an investigator or fugutive recovery agent won’t see the data which could ultimately mean an innocent person would be a crime victim. All because DRN needs to make their money. I’m still outraged!

In a conversation that I recently had with a notable figure who’s also knowledgeable about the nuts and bolts of database operations, I learned that the audits were imposed by the bigger sources of information as a contractual obligation. I do appreciate a company that cares about doing business right the first time, but I have to wonder why they decide to completely shut out a paying customer in good standing, especially a former law enforcement officer.

Do take caution when discussing this in groups where TLO sponsors the related association’s events. Your constitutional right to free speech shamefully will be restricted.

Valerie Mcgilvrey
@skipease

Copyright 2016 All Rights Reserved
This article may not be reproduced in whole or part without written permission.

[No company has paid me to write this article. I own Skip Trace Secrets Seminar and currently am not contracted to do seminars or instructional classes for any other company or corporation.]

Delvepoint-Banner-300x200-T