In a nutshell - my former college sued me for an unpaid debt - after being sued, i paid the debt off - it's been paid off over a year now. The school is still reporting the debt as over 120 days late. I've disputed the debt with CRA's - came back as valid and unpaid! I contacted the school and the lady basically stated that didn't know how to handle reporting the debt as paid. She said something about consulting their billing department regarding Perkins loans. She told me that they would "try" to get it cleared up. I've got letter's from THEIR attorney stating the debt is paid, the school knows it's paid, but don't know how to report it. How do I go about getting this settled ASAP!!!??? I'd like to get it deleted all together, but if not, I want to make sure they reflect payoff as over a year ago and not recently.
Aww, the golden letter is in your hands. Sometimes, they can figure it out by sueing them. You can try to send that letter to the CRA's, and when they promptly reject it, you can add them to the lawsuit. Its amazing they don't know how to correct it, but they can verify the information is accurate. I'd like to know if they did verify it...
That would be another question to ask the school--where they ever contacted by the CRA to verify. If they say no, get a letter to that effect as well. In the meantime, contact the CRA and ask them for the procedure they used to verify the debt, including who at the school they contacted.
Update - the school contacted me today and stated that the debt would be reported as paid in full when they do their next reporting cycle (first of the month). When I asked if it would show the correct payoff date or a recent she stated that she wasn't for sure. She also admitted that she verified the debt as unpaid back in May (6 months after it was paid in full) because she didn't have all the paper work. I don't really want to be a jerk to these people, it a small southern Christian college, but they really do seem to be ignorant in how to handle this. I asked her if it could be totally deleted and she said she would have to contact her billing company - which I don't understand because it is the school that is reporting it. Any advice on how I might could "strong arm" (without being a jerk) this situation and have it totally deleted?????
Unfortunately, you really cannot compell someone or some entity to do something without presenting an assertive posture. Is this being a jerk, perhaps but, that is a matter of perception. This is a business decision and simply because they are ignorant doesn't mean that they are not negligent. In fact, admitting that they don't know what they're doing and reported something questionably inaccurate isn't negligent at all . . . it's reckless. I would communicate that in writing to them. While you may or may not have sustained damages necessary to proceed with a civil action, I would consider indicating your willingness to do so therein.
I'm at a loss over how asking them to do their job and comply with Federal law would make you a jerk? It seems to me that their negligence and refusal to report your debt accurately makes them far more malevolent (regardless of how sweet the little-old-lady might sound over the phone) than your simply asking them to do what they are legally required to do. This reminds me of the situation where the light turns green and the first car doesn't move. Who's the jerk? The driver in the first car who is not moving (even after the 5 second (or .5 in NY) grace period) or the one behind them who honks the horn? IMO, it's the one who's asleep at the wheel even if they aren't making any noise.
Perhaps there lies the opportunity to end this matter completely, "suggest" that they just write and request this account be deleted, to end "headaches" for everyone. I would be very nice to this women and suggest something that makes "life easier" for them all, and "oh by the way" protects her from any issue with incorrect reporting. I'm guessing "honey" would work better than "salt" in this town...
Biz has a good point--you catch more flies with honey than vinegar. As to your statement that you don't understand the billing company because the school is reporting it, I'm sure it works much like payroll. They contract their billing functions out to some company. That company actually does the billing and updating to the bureaus, but does it in the school's name. So she probably doesn't understand how everything works, because the billing company takes care of it in the school's name. Work with her and I think you'll get the desired results.
Update - Thanks for all the comments - here's a rough draft of the letter I'll be sending the school - DO I HAVE A CASE?? I'm open to advice!!! (sorry for the length of the letter): Re: Intent to file suit for creditor negligence In 2005 I was sued for failure to pay on two separate accounts with XXXX University. Attorney Barry XXXX represented the school in XXXX County court. In December 2006, the debt was paid in full. XXXX University continued to report the debt as unpaid with two credit reporting agencies, TransUnion and Equifax.. In March 2007, I disputed the debt with both agencies. In a letter dated March 29, 2007, I contacted the school asking the trade lines to be updated, I also enclosed a paid in full receipt from the office of Barry XXXX. However, XXXXX University failed to give the matter due diligence and responded to the dispute with inaccurate information. The trade lines were falsely verified as â??unpaidâ?, and thus have remained on the credit reports since. I contacted the school on December 5th (left voicemail) and again on the 7th to attempt resolve the matter again. During the phone call with Rebecca XXXX on December 7th, 2007, I was told that nothing had been changed in terms of correcting the inaccurate information being reported because the office â??didnâ??t know how to do itâ?. During the next conversation on December 10th, 2007, I referred to the dispute being inaccurately verified and the response was that is was verified and reported as â??unpaidâ? because she â??didnâ??t have any paperwork on itâ?. Not on is this negligent, it is reckless. I have trouble understanding how the attorney for this case was not contacted by your party in order to report accurate information. It is very reckless for a business to not take the time to correctly report information when someone elseâ??s livelihood depends on it. During that same conversation on December 10th, 2007, I was told that the 2 accounts would be reported as â??paid in fullâ? during the reporting period of next month, which would be January 2008 - this is not good enough. My concern is centered on the inaccurate information that has been falsely verified and reported on the credit reports between May 2007 to the date of this letter, along with the damages it has caused to my credit rating, credibility and my livelihood that cannot be reversed at this point. Because of this negligence (§1323 Fair Credit Reporting Act) I intend to bring suit. While the damage has been done and cannot be corrected, I intend to dispute this debt again on December 24, 2007. If the school chooses to not respond to the disputes within 30 days, the two trade lines will be deleted from my credit reports. This is the outcome I desire and will stop further action against the school. If the school prefers, TransUnion and Equifax can be contacted before the 30 days and request both negative trade lines be deleted from each report, this will also be acceptable. Deletion of the trade lines is the only acceptable resolve to end any further action against the school. Hopefully we can come to terms on this and the both of us be able to put it behind us. Please note, all communication from this point will be written â?? no phones will be accepted.
Looks like a good rant, but I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish beyond venting. In summary, it looks like: - They sued and got a judgment in 2005. - You paid it all in 2006. - In March, 2007, you disputed the trade lines with TU and EQ. - The school incorrectly verified the debt as unpaid. - You sent the school a letter in March. - 9 months later you find out it's still being reported incorrectly (Um, why did you wait 9 months?) - You call them up to correct it and they say they don't know how but they'll figure it out and update it by January. - January isn't good enough. I can't speak for everyone, but I'd be asking if you could wait 9 months before checking on it, why can't you wait until January to see if they fix it? If you go ahead and dispute it, their most likely action is to correct it, rather than delete it. Deleting (or ignoring the verification request) would be doing you a favor and why should they do that for someone threatening to sue when all they need to do is correct the report? They are obligated to report accurately, you disputed, they (eventually) corrected. What's the problem? But, who knows? It might work or it might blow up in your face. You never know until you try.
That was my question - do I have a case of negligence? can they be held responsible for the denied credit, etc... that resulted from them not reporting correctly for 9 months? If they don't know how to handle this to this point, are they going to all of a sudden get smart? I didn't mean it as a rant - I came here with a question and was told I had leverage so use it - that's what I'm trying to do to get a deletion.
The leverage comes from the application pressure using the statutory violations that they accrue. Sticking to the facts and citing their errors is the best way to work the lever. Emotional responses mask the true power of the leverage. Put another way, a rant is usually ignored. We all fall into the rant trap from time-to-time. It is still best to avoid it if you can.
The letter reads like a rant. Consequently should anyone actually read it, and then might even care what you say, by the time they get to your requested outcome, their eyes will have long since glazed over from the barrage of facts. There's nothing particularly compelling in your recounting that would lead them to think that you have any leverage or a cause of action nor do you don't state any concrete damages (e.g. you couldn't buy a home, or whatever). Basically, whether you have a case or not is not clear from your letter. What you need to do is pick the action(s) you think is(are) negligent and then focus on the facts that support your allegation. Ideally, those allegations will also be supported by specific laws and not just legal jargon. If you go to trial, you'll need both the law and the facts. Without those elements, you're just ranting and, most likely, bluffing. For example, if their negligent action is that they didn't correctly report your judgement as paid, then focus on that: The judgement was paid in Dec 2006 and was not reported as paid after your dispute in Mar 2007. That's a reasonable cause but it gets weaker because you didn't do anything about it until Dec 2007. It's further weakened because you don't state that anything bad happened as a result of this error. If nothing happened to you as a result of the error (beyond the fact that it wasn't reported correctly), there's no damage for you to claim. But, in all honesty, a paid judgement looks only slightly better than an unpaid judgement to a human reviewing your report. To the scoring program, it doesn't make any difference if it's paid or not. If you applied for a credit card and were denied, it was probably because you had a judgement not because you had an unpaid judgement on your report. You might be able to get them to bend to your request, but not with this letter. (IMO)
Thanks for the input so far - I personally haven't suffered any damages yet, I'm just trying to get it deleted in order to get a home in 2008. This is being reported 3 times on each credit report - once as a judgement (which I'm not trying to get removed) and each account is being reported as "unpaid" and "over 120 days late". Since it's too late to get a pay for deletion, I'm trying come to terms since they were negligent in their technique.
You have nothing unless you're damaged. Dispute it once more through the credit reporting agencies. Write to them directly in a very simple fashion; this is what you did, this is what I want, or I will sue you. Not for negligence mind you but, under the FCRA.
