Re: Arrow Followed FDCPA - I am sad Ms. Pulse, I am not sure who you really say you are. I have my doubts, but then I have been wrong before. My suggestion (and I know it is usually a no-no on this board) but I suggest a reputable, non profit CCCS. If your husband is not willing to contribute and they will not accept a payment plan CCCS will be able to help. I find it astounding the surprise and quick turnaround about Arrow filing a case against you, and the very astute FDCPA validation of your debt (since many others have had problems against them and they did not receive just in depth evalulation), but sometimes these happens (supposely). Good luck. Dani
Pulse, I worked in the financial industry from 1983 thru 1999. I filed for bankruptcy in 1992. During my employment from 1993 thru 1997 when my employment required being bonded, I had no issues with the fact that I had filed for bankruptcy. I don't think that you would have a problem with being bonded after filing. It may be something specific to your current employer. You should anonymously call various agencies and ask questions about employment/bankruptcy on record. I am sugggesting this because you feel bankruptcy is not an option due to your job. I don't think it would stop you from getting another job. This is something you could check and find out about. KK
I've taken my time out to read this entire thread and am amazed. First, why are people suggesting going to CCCS when she's already been given a summons? CCCS can't stop that! The wheels are in motion...far past the CCCS station. The other thing is this - I didn't see her original post, but did she give detailed info regarding the situation? (i.e. I have a charge off for over 5k that....)? Lastly, it's ridiculous to put a disclaimer on this board! Unless someone identifies themselves as professional, we are all amateurs. It goes without saying, EVEN WITH A PROFESSIONAL, get a 2nd opinion! I will be one of those who will say, I have NO idea as to what Pulse should do. Any reasonable human who comes here should know - Advice Seekers beware! I agree 100% with Roni. Sometimes you're just going to have to pay. If you enter debt repair and if blows up in your face, be prepared to deal with the consequences...and know what those are, PRIOR to entering.
WHAT A VERY SAD STORY PULSE. PLEASE DON'T TAKE THE ADVICE OF MEMBERS HERE TO HEART. THEY ARE NOT IN YOUR SHOES. ITS EASY TO TALK ABOUT LAWSUITS ON CREDIT BUREAUS,COLLECTION AGENCYS, AND EVEN THE IRS. LAWYER WANNA BEES. BUT DOING IT TAKES LOTS OF TIME AND MONEY. MONEY IT SEEMS YOU DON'T HAVE. SOME MEMBERS MAY THINK THEY KNOW HOW TO GET AROUND THE SYSTEM, BUT INSTRUCTING OTHERS TO DO IT IS ANOTHER THING. MY PRAYERS ARE WITH YOU TONIGHT. SORRY WE LET YOU DOWN. I WAS BURNED MYSELF BY A FEW MEMBERS GIVING OUT BAD ADVICE.
Re: Arrow Followed FDCPA - I am sad Watch how you talk pulse, what you just said to doc could be construed as a threat. Considering this is a public forum, that's not a smart move.
Re: Arrow Followed FDCPA - I am sad I also wanted to say, I feel really bad for what happened to you pusle, but taking the advice of people that you never even met, and acting on that without verifying it was silly. Personal responsibility has to come into play here somewhere. Again..I am very sorry for what happened to you, and I think you made some valid points.
Excuse me, look around you - many of us are in her shoes. Last I checked, filing suit in small claims takes a day and a few dollars - how does that translate into lots of time and money??? Are you for real?
You were "burned" by nobody but yourself. If you take the first advice without investigating further and it doesn't work, blame yourself and nobody else. Time to come up for some air.
Just curious have any other members received validation from Arrow? I knew they had made several violations and there were pending lawsuits against them, but was not sure. Them getting their act together, is this a recent occurence? Dani
In defense of my position I suggested CCCS as an alterative to stop (or withdraw) the court case. Would the collection agency be willing to agree to a payment plan? Maybe not with her, may so. Most will deal with CCCS though. It could possibly be too late, then again maybe not. At this intersection, she needs to stop the lawsuit, even if it means paying them $50-100 a month. They want their money, they don't want to go to court. If they get a judgement against her they have no guarantee she will pay. I only suggested this because I did this when a custsomer did not pay their bill. They refused. So I filed a case in small claims court against them. After they were served the gentleman called me asking if he could agree to make payments. I gave him the benefit of the doubt and he sent me a check every two weeks for $100. After he made two payments I dropped the case. it took six months, but he did pay me. I was thinking of the CCCS as a go between, not as a means of repairing her credit. Dani
I am sorry but I have to say it. Reading the many negative discussions that pulse has started today, not only about arrow, but other ca's as well, and taking into to consideration the lightning speed in which Arrow accurately validated in compliance with the FDCPA, FCRA. Then immediately turned around and filed suit against pulse when she was communicating with them. Could it be possible that Pulse is an agent of the collection industry trying to scare all of us from validating debts. I am not accusing, rather I am posing a theoretical question... Does this board have any controls in place to identify such activity? Any thoughts on the subject?
Randy, Your hypothetical question is a great one - and conversations I've had with another informed Creditnet member certainly makes it a possibility... ...but I hesitate to voice assumptions like that simply because it lends valid concerns to being victims of "CA witch hunts". After all, I tried to suggest that a woman actually think about paying her bill to MBNA, and I got labeled an undercover CC representative... :-/ What if the CA validates and sues? What if the CRA codes your file as frivolous after a dispute? What if you sue and the CA/OC countersues? What if you try the LK approach and they call your bluff? These are important considerations, and if a person experiences one of these issues, I wouldn't want their discussion of it on this board to be labeled a "CA plant" and dismissed. That would be a disservice to everybody. Jesus said, "with the wheat grows the tares, but don't pull up the tares now - for you might get the wheat, too.." Eventually "plants" will show their true colors - namely by repetitive (over weeks) posting on the same subject of "X doesn't work".
Mitchra I was thinking the same thing myself. I think Dani was right on track. Have other members has this lightning fast Validation? Pulse, I am not trying to be heartless, but my late father used to say "A bought lesson is better than a free one" A CA's promise to remove negative tradelines for the OC cost me $1000.00. If I had only done more research, I would have found out that the CA is only obligated to remove their own listing. (Thanks Nave) tix
Re: Arrow Followed FDCPA - I am sad Hi, Ray, I'm actually Randy. Who's on first? Marci, I completely agree with you. It was only after taking a close look at her rhetorical style and the unbelievably quick pace of her calendar (as provided by several other sharp-eyed Creditnet members) that I finally arrived at my opinion. But, yes, you are correct... Thankfully, all of us are entitled to an opinion, and we might be wrong! Based upon the evidence I've seen, I would handicap my chances of being correct at about 90% (obviously a number pulled out of the air -- no true statistics were used to arrive at that figure, lol). Still, there's a 1 in 10 shot that I'm wrong. I'm comfortable with that. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. I don't think so, but your warnings are well taken. Doc
Nobody has said "don't validate for debts over X amount, but it has been said many, many times that if it is a large debt and the SOL hasn't run out, it is best to let sleeping dogs lie. Just sounds like a crock to me, The thread just started and now they've validated, filed and served her. My, how expeditious they are. Gib
Re: Arrow Followed FDCPA - I am sad Hi Ray! It's very nice to meet you , too. Randy, Well... I read your other post breaking down the time line (which I didn't follow carefully) and e-mails from other members, and I must admit that it looks quite fishy. Sad. This is the last thing CreditNet needs. The one member we once shared in a group e-mail (this doesn't sound right, but it's the best way I can describe it - lol) told me some horrifying reasons why they didn't want to be included in that e-mail. So, I don't put it past CAs, CRAs, or OCs to pull a stunt like this. I just hate to see it happen... :-(
