$2K for settlement...should I agree

Discussion in 'Credit Talk' started by WranglerTJ, Aug 21, 2003.

  1. WranglerTJ

    WranglerTJ Well-Known Member

    This is a response to my original thread:
    http://www.creditboards.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=63342&highlight=#63342

    I sent this letter to the nasty CA via fax last week. I got a FedEx package this morning...ten minutes ago. I was scared to open it. Well I did, saw that it was from a lawyer out of Chicago.

    The letter states that basically that since I have not retained counsel yet, they have agreed to discuss the matter with me. They agreed to my request and offer to settle the dispute referenced in my Aug 12, 2003 letter under the following terms:

    1. Wrangler will execute a full and complete release and settlement agreement releasing CA, its agents, successors, assigns, predecessors, attorneys, insurers, affiliates, associates, shareholders, principals, divisions, parents, subsidiaries, servants, officers, directors, employers, related companies, representatives, etc. of any and all liability, duties or obligations.

    2. In turn, CA will delete the tradelines as you have requested and pay Wrangler $2000 subject to the executed settlement agreement and release. In addition, CA will agree to close Wranglers above referenced account and agrees not to sell, transfer, and or reassign Wranglers referenced accopunt to a lender.

    This offer is valid for 10 days.


    WOOHOO...I never believed that it would work. How should I respond to them? By letter stating I agree, or should I call since I do have it in writing? With this $2000 I could negotiate settlement on all of my other neg's and be clean!! If my DW will let me.

    Let me know how I should answer.
     
  2. jlynn

    jlynn Well-Known Member

    Great job! My only question would be do they own the debt to agree not to transfer, etc. If its still owned by the OC, they could conceivably reassign it.
     
  3. Flyingifr

    Flyingifr Well-Known Member

    I would have them insert a statement to the effect that the CA has full authority to bind the OC to this agreement, and the OC agrees to all its terms, including permanent deletion of the trade line.
     
  4. Genius1

    Genius1 Active Member

    I would also add that you will pay the $2000 owed over a period of 4 months at $500 a month - with the first payment due by Sept 10th and then all future payments due by the 10th of each month.
    Trade line must be deleted no later than 30 days from last payment
     
  5. Flyingifr

    Flyingifr Well-Known Member

    You got it wrong - CA is paying HER.
     
  6. lbrown59

    lbrown59 Well-Known Member

    Re: Re: $2K for settlement...should I agree

     
  7. cashback

    cashback Active Member

    Wow..

    You don't pay them but you get money from them and settle and deletion?

    You just blowed me! How did you make this happen?
    I've just started my credit repair and need help from people like you. Can you email me those legal document you sent them to get this response? I want to keep it in case I need a sample in the future. Of course I am keeping your letter as a sample too. It was very well written I think.


    -cashback
     
  8. cashback

    cashback Active Member

    BTW, If I were you, I would make a contract in writing. I would put their terms and add any necessary terms needed for my protection (But nothing major addition or changes which can cause them re-think). And sign on it, send this to them, have them sign on it, have them send me back with $2000 check!
     
  9. lbrown59

    lbrown59 Well-Known Member

    Wow..You don't pay them but you get money from them and settle and deletion?
    You just blowed me!
    3*How did you make this happen?
    cashback
    ===============
    0_0_0_0
    /l ,[____],
    l---L --OlllllllO-
    ()_) ()_)----)_)


    DID IT BY KNOWING HIS RIGHTS AND ENFORCING THE LAW.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------




    THE END ** *** ** LB 59
    """"```--~~~~~~~~~--```'""'''




     
  10. jlynn

    jlynn Well-Known Member

    Keep reading and learning. I just had a CA pay off a credit card for me that they were trying to collect on :).

    Quite a few of us have made some nice pocket change by knowing the law.


    Wrangler is a guy.
     
  11. WranglerTJ

    WranglerTJ Well-Known Member

    This original debt was only for $271. I had the CA on many violations...more than the $2000 I asked for settlement from. I just did not want to go all the way to Chicago for an attorney and thought I would offer to settle.

    The OC is Heilig Meyers. I'm pretty sure they are bankrupt, but I don't know if the CA bought the debt or not.

    I'm going to try to type up my own settlement agreement to be a little more specific as to what I want deleted and from which report, and when deletion should occur... See what I can come up with...

    Hopefully I can clean my other reports with the $$
     
  12. GEORGE

    GEORGE Well-Known Member

    "IF" you got ALL YOUR DUCKS IN A ROW...GO FOR IT!!!
     
  13. GEORGE

    GEORGE Well-Known Member

    May be to late...BUT it would have been good to put a NON DISCLOSURE in it..."THEY" can not CONFIRM OR DENY THAT THEY EVER DID BUSINESS WITH YOU...

    There is a SLIGHT possibility it may come back in the future (EVEN IF THEY AGREE TO ALL THE TERMS)...they may get bought out and the "TERMS" company #1 agreed to HAVE NO BARRING ON COMPANY #2
     
  14. arobinson

    arobinson Well-Known Member

    Re: Re: $2K for settlement...should I agree

    I had this happen..it was for a Montgomery Wards card...I never included the debt in my BK7. But a CA that tried to collect it from me $1300.00 could not validate. They violated the FDCPA 3 seperate times, I sued them for permanant deletion and got deletion and $1750.00. Well about 6 months later they apparently sold the debt so I sued not only the CA that bought it but them again. I ended up getting another $1000.00 from both CA's.

    The funny thing is I just forgot to include this debt in my BK7.

    Oh well...if another CA buys Wranglers debt..he can get the chance to sue them again.
     
  15. lsmith15

    lsmith15 Well-Known Member

    Re: Re: $2K for settlement...should I agree

    I have had two settle with me Sherman for one and Verizon the other one, I just sent them a letter stating that I accept there offer of there letter of XX/XX/XXXX, and that I expected the money to be sent to me via US certified mail no later then 14 days after the receipt of the settlement statement I sent back to them. Got my money within the 14 days from each one. I am in Federal Court now on my TU law suit have an offer from them to settle for 1775...... but sent them a counter offer. Just faxed over to Three CA a copy of my intent to sue letter which each one already has received and a copy of my complaint that unless they settle with me that I will be filing in Federal Court on each one the first week of September. Gonna wait and see what that does if they do not respond I will file on them and will be asking for more then the 3,000 I have offered to settle with them in my intent to sue.
     
  16. Marie

    Marie Well-Known Member

    Re: Re: $2K for settlement...should I agree

    I have a problem with 2 words...SUCCESSORS

    Successors=One that succeeds another.
    Succeeds=To come next in time or succession; follow after another; replace another in an office or a position

    so you'd be letting them off the hook (successors) forever...NO... there should be NO SUCCESSORS! it's contradictory...

    and ASSIGNS:Law. To transfer (property, rights, or interests) from one to another.

    there should also be no assigns.. it makes no sense. Take out those 2 words (or strike through them with their permission.. in blue ink and copy it all).. and write in something like.. (with their permission)...

    "CA understands that this full release is good for all violations and actions up until x.x. 2003 at the time of this signing... if any action from this date forward violates either this agreement or any Federal or state law, (YOUR NAME HERE) will hold that party liable to the fullest extent of the law.

    They can rewrite it or you can. Talk with them.

    I have actually heard of this happening... agreement signed.. later acct sold.. CA2 violates FDCPA and FCRA and agreement with CA1 to even have the account.. person sues CA1 and CA2.. loses b/c of full release now and in the future..

    The point is this: even with the best of intentions on CA1's part, errors might still happen.

    Have them take out those 2 words (SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS), and let them or you add in you release them from all liablity up until the date you sign the release...tell them since you're not an atty you need it in plain language that if they do anything in the future about the debt, sell it, assign it etc that they understand you'll hold them for it.

    They can rereport it, assign it etc and then the release keeps you from ever doing something to the SUCCESSORS... see ;) it's too broad as written.

    Just tell them you need it in a bit plainer and boxed in so that your future rights aren't compromised.. else you have to hire an atty to draft the release changes and they'd have to add 1k for the fees...
     
  17. WranglerTJ

    WranglerTJ Well-Known Member

    Re: Re: $2K for settlement...should I agree

    Thanks maria for the input. I hate trying to decipher all the legalese of legal stuff!!! Luckily the attorney I'm working with is on vacation until Sep 2. Gives me time to concoct a different settlement agreement .
     
  18. WranglerTJ

    WranglerTJ Well-Known Member

    Re: Re: $2K for settlement...should I agree

    marie, what if I took out these references from that whole paragraph:

    successors, assigns, affiliates, predecessors, divisions, parents, subsidiaries, related companies

    I see what your saying, if these are left in there, i'm releasing anybody they are affiliated with or transfer to from liability. Am I seeing this clearer now? The new paragraph would look like this:

    I, being or acting as the Authorized Agent for or on behalf of CA, L.L.C., will absolve and release from liability Wrangler, any debts due, claims and or judgments owed to CA, L.L.C., its agents, attorneys, insurers, associates, shareholders, principals, servants, officers, directors, employees, representatives, etc. or any of their agents or representatives who act in their behalf. Furthermore, CA, L.L.C. agrees not to sell, transfer, or reassign the referenced account to another lender, debt collector, debt buyer, collection agency or other third party collection entity
     
  19. WranglerTJ

    WranglerTJ Well-Known Member

    Re: Re: $2K for settlement...should I agree

    bump for update...O.K...got the settlement agreement via e-mail today for my review and signature. I have a confidentiality clause, but since I haven't signed it yet, I need some quick advice.

    In regards to the settlement agreement i sent to the lawyer, the original one...not the one I modified after Marie's post, the paragragh above is not amended into the settlement agreement. The paragraph stands as:

    Wrangler, hereby remises, releases and forever discharges Rotten CA and its agents, assigns, successors, predecessors , attorneys, affiliates, associates, shareholders, principals, divisions, parents, subsidiaries , servants, directors, officers, employees, former employees, related companies , representatives, brokers, insurers, etc., of and from any and all claims, duties, obligations, liability, controversies, actions, causes of action, damages, costs, fees, or demands, known or unknown, of any kind or character whatsoever, (â??Claimsâ?), which Wrangler now has or claims to have, or ever had, or which may hereafter accrue in favor of Wrangler against Rotten CA by reason of, or in any way involving, relating to or arising out of the Trade Lines. The Release in this paragraph is intended to be a general release by Wrangler of Rotten CA.

    I'm worried about these words again, as stated above...in case they transfer or redistribute to another affiliate. But later in the release and consideration clause it states:

    2.Rotten CA will close Wrangler's account number 123456789 and will not sell, transfer, or reassign said account to another creditor or report said account to any credit reporting agency after the execution of this Agreement;

    Would this cover any of the above concerns about the account? I know I should never trust a CA, but would that be an affirmitive defense if they did re-assign or sell to someone else?

    Oh...just noticed something too...the account number they are referring to is not the account number that is on my report. It is their in house reference number. I have to add the actual number thats on my credit report.

    Give me some feedback please...
     
  20. WranglerTJ

    WranglerTJ Well-Known Member

    Re: Re: $2K for settlement...should I agree

    bump for update...

    O.K...got the settlement agreement via e-mail today for my review and signature. I have a confidentiality clause, but since I haven't signed it yet, I need some quick advice.

    In regards to the settlement agreement i sent to the lawyer, the original one...not the one I modified after Marie's post, the paragragh above is not amended into the settlement agreement. The paragraph stands as:

    Wrangler, hereby remises, releases and forever discharges Rotten CA and its agents, assigns, successors, predecessors , attorneys, affiliates, associates, shareholders, principals, divisions, parents, subsidiaries , servants, directors, officers, employees, former employees, related companies , representatives, brokers, insurers, etc., of and from any and all claims, duties, obligations, liability, controversies, actions, causes of action, damages, costs, fees, or demands, known or unknown, of any kind or character whatsoever, (â??Claimsâ?), which Wrangler now has or claims to have, or ever had, or which may hereafter accrue in favor of Wrangler against Rotten CA by reason of, or in any way involving, relating to or arising out of the Trade Lines. The Release in this paragraph is intended to be a general release by Wrangler of Rotten CA.

    I'm worried about these words again, as stated above...in case they transfer or redistribute to another affiliate. But later in the release and consideration clause it states:

    2.Rotten CA will close Wrangler's account number 123456789 and will not sell, transfer, or reassign said account to another creditor or report said account to any credit reporting agency after the execution of this Agreement;

    Would this cover any of the above concerns about the account? I know I should never trust a CA, but would that be an affirmitive defense if they did re-assign or sell to someone else?

    Oh...just noticed something too...the account number they are referring to is not the account number that is on my report. It is their in house reference number. I have to add the actual number thats on my credit report.

    Give me some feedback please...
     

Share This Page