in regards to CA's updating the status date to make collections appear newer than they actually are. As all the litigious nutcases should know by heart, the FDCPA states: § 807. False or misleading representations [15 USC 1692e] A debt collector may not use any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt. § 808. Unfair practices [15 USC 1692f] A debt collector may not use unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect any debt. Personally, I think that the updating of the status is the equivalent of psuedo-reaging, and is an unfair and misleading representation of the actual date of status designed to further damage consumers credit scores. I'd like to see some case law established in relation to this, or at the bare minimum some sort of admission from FICO created and entered into public record that anyone can use against a CA that updates the status. This would be a boon to all those out there who are dealing with the scumbags. I would do it myself, but I do not have any collection agencies reporting currently. Is there anyone out there up to the challenge?
"in regards to CA's updating the status date to make collections appear newer than they actually are." -didnt know we were talking about it, but ok. -What exactly are you referrring to when you say "updating the status date"? "Personally, I think that the updating of the status is the equivalent of psuedo-reaging, and is an unfair and misleading representation of the actual date of status designed to further damage consumers credit scores." -Actually, since the "status date" does little to effect the listing of the account, it really IS NOT an issue. The "status date" DOES NOT effect the 7 year reporting period. "I'd like to see some case law established in relation to this, or at the bare minimum some sort of admission from FICO created and entered into public record that anyone can use against a CA that updates the status. This would be a boon to all those out there who are dealing with the scumbags." -Case law would be hard to find on this subject. It would require expert testimony on the "score system" of each credit reporting agency. (which I am not sure anyone actually knows LOL) -Nutcase? lol I would do it myself, but I do not have any collection agencies reporting currently. Is there anyone out there up to the challenge? [/B][/QUOTE]
Re: Re: Re: A challenge to all the nutcases... I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that unless a CA has received a DV and failed to respond, or is past SOL for litigation purposes, and has been sent a C&D, they can update the status date every time they review the account for collectability, regardless of whether they send out any new mail or make a phone call. And I don't think the review would even need to be something a live human being looks at. The status date could simply mean it's still on the CAs database as unpaid as of a date, and thus it goes out on the magnetic tape to the CRA that month, as it has for all previous months. If that tanks a debtor's FICO, tough luck. It doesn't look "Brand New" it just looks like something that collection efforts are currently being made on. Regardless of how desultory those efforts may be.
Re: Re: Re: A challenge to all the nutcases... this sounds like something that chick--christine @ bayhouse is it?--who's on a freaking MISSION (suing the CRAs, and the FTC) might be interested in...IF she hasnt already thought of it herself. she's my idol, lol.
