I have a charge-off with Citi. They sent it to a collection agency whom I sent a verification letter to. They never responded. The thing is, the letter they sent to me in the end of November the balance was 1808. It is not in less then 2 months 2201. How does this happen? I don't get how intrest would be that high in 2 months. Can they charge interest after it is charged off? Oh and by the way, they had not updated the report since 5/98 and since I sent that letter to collections it was just updated in 11/01.
Collection costs...interest...and yes, they probably can charge interest. It may be in your original card agreement. Oh and BTW...They can update it whenever they want. You just made them remember that you owed the money. Sorry.
A charge off results in a $0.00 Balance Since the CA never validated this should have been deleated IT happens b/c they try to pull a fast one on us What inst. on a 0 Bal.?
How can there be Interest on a 0 balance charge off? If there could be who gets it the CA or the Orig.creditor ? Are you saying you should not ask for validation because it will remind them that you owe them money?
Ok I understand that I owe the debt, I am not saying that I don't. The thing is, I got a letter from the collection agency, they didn't respond. I then sent the estoppal letter on still nothing (that was the one that was sent 30+ days ago. Is that fair when they CAN'T show me proof to do this? I mean this is 400.00 in less then a month!
I tried to shed some light on the accounting behind a charge off at this thread: http://consumers.creditnet.com/straighttalk/board/showthread.php?s=&postid=123147#post123147 The original poster said that the charge off balance was NOT $0.00. Meaning that the business did not report that was the balance, and hence is charging interest on the balance that it charged off. (Well, maybe they're calling the interest 'fees' but it amounts to the same thing). Hope it helps, Myschae
No, they need to prove to you that the debt is yours by verifying the debt. Also you have a right to know what category they're putting the extra charges in. I would suspect that they aren't calling it all 'interest' most of it is probably some sort of 'penalty' which amounts to the same thing. I THINK if they call it interest the APR would have to be disclosed to you. But, there is nothing to keep a business from adding charges to a receivable (debt) that is charged off. At least as far as accounting goes, I'm not sure what the FDCPA says (anyone?). Especially since this doesn't seem to be the original merchant. Myschae
I thought they had to cease all collection efforts while you are disputing the item. Wouldn't this be a violation of FCRA or something like that? Maybe you can get them on this item since you have proof of your dispute and proof of thier continued collection activities.
I am not sure. I sent the letters to a collection agency that was hired to collect the debt NOT to citi. The collection agency hasn't placed anything on my report, citi just added 400.00.
Well maybe I can help, I have a similar situation and I have the background to maybe get you some answers. A company can charge interest and fees when and account has been charged-off, but the company may not have taken the profit-and-loss write off with the IRS, they may be deferring it. Companies do this to get a hefty accrual of fees and interest before they actually write it off. First I have some questions. 1. You sent a validation of debt to the CA, did they send an intial notice that they are handling the debt? Did you dispute the veracity of the entry with the CRA and the CA responded to the inquiry from the bureau? 2. Was the CA assigned the debt or are they now the owner. There is a big distinction. 3. Did you make any agreement to pay the account with CA, and actually put that in writing. Your situation sounds so ripe with illegalities and mistakes, many people on this board could have a field day with all the violations of the FCRA and FDCPA.
Again, I repeat, there is no zero balance on charge offs. And no, I was not suggesting that at all. What I said was, she asked them for validation on an account that hasn't been reported for some time...thus resulting in an update. Something that the creditors are allowed to do. How are you helping anyone by answering a question with a question?
Yes, I sent it as soon as I got the first letter stating that I had 30 days. I only disputed it to the collection agency. I have no idea who owns it. I made no agreement of any kind. I said prove it.
do not call, do all your correspondence in writing. When you sent the validation letter, did you also dispute with the cra..... it is not clear from your post.
Well I think you got them dead meat.. They can continue to list the debt with the major bureaus for 30 days from the initial communication. If they don't provide you validation of the debt in very a specific way, they are in violation of section 609 of the FDCPA(Fair Debt Collection Practices Act). They cannot continue to list the debt with the major bureaus until they give you satisfactory validation. Go to the FDCPA site http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fdcpajump.htm and read up on validation as it pertains to the FDCPA, also the opinion letters. A CA cannot send you statements or even a signed application, that does NOT comply with section 609. If you sent estoppel then move on to a demand letter, and forward all correspondance to the bureaus listing the debt, with a demand that they remove this erroneous and unprovable entry.
I am not sure if that applies to me. I requested verification from the collection agency not the original creditor (Citi). The collection agency did not place the account on my credit report. I responded in the 30 days.
