Wife has a bounced check from 1999 in collections with some law firm, showing as a chargeoff on her credit report. It's only about $150, so paying for a settlement is not a big deal. I'm considering calling them today and, without admitting the debt is valid, just asking them what it will take for them to delete from Experian. I'm just hesitating though, because it seems like it's out of statute. What should I do here?
If they discuss this matter with you, you wife should sue them for unlawful disclosure (unless you are your own wife). Before anyone calls, check to see if it's out of Statute. Next, why are you in such a hurry to settle?
Re: Re: About to call CA on OLD bounced chk I see that in California, written contracts are 4 years statute. But what does that mean I have to do in order to get it off the credit report? Send them some sort of estoppel letter mentioning SOL and complete deletion from CRAs? Well, I'm really only in a hurry to get the item deleted. How that gets done is secondary.
Re: Re: About to call CA on OLD bounced chk How about this letter? Dear Sirs: A recent review of my credit reports indicates an account which your organization is claiming was opened for some type of collection in XXXX of 19XX in the amount of $XXX and an account type of â??Returned Checkâ?. Please be advised that this communication in no way confirms the validity of your claim against me. In fact, I categorically refute your claims. Furthermore, I wish to point out that the statute of limitations on written contracts in the State of California is four years (see California Code of Civil Procedure §337), which time has already passed since your alleged account was opened, and since any alleged violation by me may have taken place. Accordingly, pursuant to the Fair Credit Reporting Act, I am requesting that you immediately delete the disputed item from any and all credit reporting agencies. In the event that you continue to list the disputed item on my credit report, I will find it necessary to sue you for actual damages and declaratory relief under the FCRA. While I prefer not to litigate, I will use the courts as needed to enforce my rights under the FCRA. I look forward to an uneventful resolution of this matter.
Re: Re: About to call CA on OLD bounced chk I guess this letter is kind of a combination of SOL and cease and desist. Am I skipping a step? Should I first try the validation approach?
Re: Re: About to call CA on OLD bounced chk The statute of limitations for REPORTING is 7 years. It has nothing to do with the SOL for collections.
Re: Re: Re: About to call CA on OLD bounced chk You have no grounds for a suit ! They have the legal right to report this until 2006.
Re: Re: Re: Re: About to call CA on OLD bounced chk This letter goes to the collectors, not the CRAs. I'm not asking any CRA to delete it prematurely. They wouldn't anyway. Although the CA has not updated the account with the CRA since the chargeoff last year, isn't the fact that it's still listed on my wife's CR a kind of "collection", which is barred after 4 years, and which the CA can be compelled to delete? Someone previously said "check to see if it's out of statute". Well, it is. Now what?
Re: Re: Re: Re: About to call CA on OLD bounced chk "Although the CA has not updated the account with the CRA since the chargeoff last year, isn't the fact that it's still listed on my wife's CR a kind of "collection", which is barred after 4 years, and which the CA can be compelled to delete? Someone previously said "check to see if it's out of statute". Well, it is. Now what? " -Some clarificaiton: -"Statute" or "SOL" or "Statute of limitations" refers to a states "time limit" during which a debt can be persued in COURT! -THERE IS NOT "SOL" FOR THE COLLECTION OF DEBTS. A debt collector can attempt to collect a debt FOREVER! -The "reporting period" is the 7 year period a "bad debt" can be reported on a consumers credit report. -Collection agencies can ONLY be "compelled" by a court to delete an entry. Collection agencies and other "furnishers of information" can "request" the reporting agency delete an entry. -I cant understand where the whole "dont admit to the debt" thing came from, but IT IS IRRELEVENT in the debt collection process. UNLESS IT IS NOT YOURS -Its the debt collection/reporting that is regualted REGARDLESS of liability. "Accordingly, pursuant to the Fair Credit Reporting Act, I am requesting that you immediately delete the disputed item from any and all credit reporting agencies. In the event that you continue to list the disputed item on my credit report, I will find it necessary to sue you for actual damages and declaratory relief under the FCRA. While I prefer not to litigate, I will use the courts as needed to enforce my rights under the FCRA. " -REMEMBER, this is an attorney you are sending this to! HE WILL SEE RIGHT THROUGH THIS. THERE IS NO CONSUMER REMEDY IF THEY DO NOT DELETE IT. IF he replied, it would be a court summons -IF YOU MUST, a better approach is to let them know the reporting period is only 2 more years and they havent gotten any $ thus far. Offer to settle (or pay in full) in exchange for deletion. IF they dont agree, just be patient for the 2 years and dont let it bother you
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: About to call CA on OLD bounced chk 1*-THERE IS NOT "SOL" FOR THE COLLECTION OF DEBTS. A debt collector can attempt to collect a debt FOREVER 1*-THERE IS NOT "SOL" FOR THE COLLECTION OF DEBTS. A debt collector can attempt to collect a debt FOREVER REMEMBER, this is an attorney you are sending this to! HE WILL SEE RIGHT THROUGH THIS. THERE IS NO CONSUMER REMEDY IF THEY DO NOT DELETE IT. 2*IF he replied, it would be a court summons 3-IF YOU MUST, a better approach is to let them know the reporting period is only 2 more years and they havent gotten any $ thus far. Offer to settle (or pay in full) in exchange for deletion. IF they dont agree, just be patient for the 2 years and dont let it bother you hiding90 ********************************** 1*Even bogus fake non existent or paid ones. 2*Summons for what-? 3*They never take it off the report when we make it right so why should we take it off the docket when they do?? ><- <>- ><- <> ~~~ ><- <>- ><-
Thank you, hiding90, for the informative clarification. This is the most concrete advice I've received yet.
1*Someone previously said "check to see if it's out of statute". Well, it is. Now what? 2*isn't the fact that it's still listed on my wife's CR a kind of "collection", which is barred after 4 years, and which the CA can be compelled to delete? Jpeg Jones ************************** ==================================== 1*You don't have to pay it. 2*no Because it's only bared form having to pay it.This has no effect on the 7 years that they can report it. They never take it off the report when we make it right so why should we take it off the docket when they do?? ><- <>- ><- <> ~~~ ><- <>- ><- <> ><- <>- ><- <> ~~~ ><- <>- ><- <>
I cant understand where the whole "dont admit to the debt" thing came from, but IT IS IRRELEVENT in the debt collection process. UNLESS IT IS NOT YOURS hiding90 ============================= If you admit it don't make it easier for them to prove it when they sue you????
Before you do anything which firm has it because if it is JBC or wexler I would never trust them. total scum.
