The perverted benefit of disputing a judgment compared to an actual credit line is that you do not risk waking up a sleeping giant ie the CRA will contact the courthouse for verification and not the creditor. I doubt that the courthouse will contact the holder of the judgment when they receive they dispute-they could care less, plus they're way too busy (or lazy) :O) But, they CRA may contact the judgment holder directly to verify the judgment...I wonder how often that happens? Anyone know?
the judgement is issued by court order an only the court can accurately verify the status of a judgement. This is because they are the" furnisher".
Most public records are available online now. Many CRA's have a subscription which enables them to log in and check it out. Most county courts have their civil cases online where anyone can look up info for free. Equifax reported incorrectly for many months and I finally insisted they check with the court house directly. Evidently the database they were subscribed to wasn't up to date. Don't believe that they ALWAYS go to the court house because it just isn't the case. Court houses do not "furnish" information. They make it public and CRA's buy it from company's who have databased public record.
So why worry about it? Most judgments are null and void upon their face and if they are you file motion to vacate void judgment and get rid of it.
Bill can you elaborate please? What do you mean they are null and void on their face? Under what grounds would you move to vacate? Thanks!
a lot of people have posted about "motions to vacate" but you should check your local laws. It is very restrictive where I live on how to vacate a judgement. in response to the other posts, My point is that the information source for public records is the court (court clerk), even when that info is available on line. It is doubtful the cra would check with the ca at all. The information (deletion) has to come from the furnisher or their lack of response in 30 days.
In what way is it restrictive where you live? If a judgment is null and void upon it's face it is a legal nullity from it's inception and is always vacatable in any jurisdiction at anytime regardless of any rule or law to the contrary. It is just as vacatable 100 years from now as it was the day it was issued.
A void judgment is a judgment that is a legal nullity It is as though it never existed in the first place and once it is voided it can not be reported by any CRA because their doing so would constitute false information. As so many do, even attorneys, Uniondiva is thinking about a vacatable judgment and in making the comment he did in the context he had in mind he is absolutely correct. Getting a judgment vacated is a tough proposition indeed and is almost never done except in extremely rare circumstances. Judges will sometimes vacate a judgment that has been satisfied if the plaintiff is willing to have it done by his attorney but that is not often done because it would usually cost them to have their attorney do that. Even then they are sometimes simply sealed rather than vacated. A void judgment is an entirely different matter. A void judgment is void because of some error of the court and in most cases a collateral attack upon the judgment must be made based on some error which caused the court to have no jurisdiction in the matter.
But, the CRA may contact the judgment holder directly to verify the judgment. ..I wonder how often that happens? Anyone know? :O) :O) :O) :O) :O) :O) :O) :O) :O) :O) :O) :O) : =================================== This don't prove it. The END ************************* LB 59
