You don't need to go to the courthouse to see if there is a judgment against you. A credit report is broken down into sections, judgments are found in the public records section. Check there.
Re: Re: Bad, bad gut instinct Mycroft, why is it that you insist on injecting comments and advice that is often downright dangerous if anybody were to follow it, useless at best? Credit reports may alert one to the fact that there may be a judgment against them and on the other hand have been known in a great many cases to list judgments that are for someone with a similiar name or with address problems? It is a known fact backed up by research statistics that about half of all credit reports contain false or faulty information and yet you want to advise someone to use that instead of going right to the repository of the information and getting the full truth of them matter! I just happen to have a state tax lien on my report and it is a totally false and bogus report. It isn't a tax lien at all and it never was. It was a problem with a motor vehicle title and the report even carries the notation MV and then the number of the supposed lien after that. And the stupid state refuses to correct it's errors. I don't much feel like trying to sue the state of Oklahoma. Its about to fall off this year anyway and its so old that it don't hurt my score anymore. Plus that I have a 100 word or less statement explaining exactly what it is and why it happened. So that negates it entirely for all practical purposes. I know of a couple of people who do have judgments against them and they don't show up on their credit reports and they never will because the credit bureaus can't possibly find them and could not correllate the judgments to the person under any circumstances. And that's why it isn't worth the time and trouble to get them voided. They are so goofed up they could not be collected on even if they tried. But this lady apparently has a totally different problem. She needs to go to the court house and get to the whole truth of the matter and she can't do that using your simplistic advice. Even if it is listed on her credit report that isn't going to tell her one single thing worth knowing. As many others here have said in a multitude of posts , you need to pipe down and learn before you try to give harmful advice to others.
Re: Re: Re: Bad, bad gut instinct I've never met a bill collector that had anything to do with how an account reported to the bureaus. That's someone else's department. That's a very confusing paragraph, Bill. You say "To use Mycroft's example..." and then you don't give an example of anything. Did you forget to finish that one? That assumes that they break the law. Bill, I've collected from guys like you before. Guys that want to get all legal and everything, who claim I've broken some law when I know darn well I didn't. When they threatened to sue me I always said, "If you're going to do that, go ahead. I'll appreciate a paid day off work and I'll be more than happy to explain myself to anyone. But that's not going to make this debt go away, If you're willing to talk to me for a moment, we'll see if we can't find a way for you to deal with it." And then the person would either hang up on me because he's upset I wasn't intimidated, or he'd end up writing me a check. If he hung up, I knew there was a good chance I'd get him next week. You can't make it as a bill collector if you're easily intimidated. If you caved every time someone threatened to sue, you wouldn't last a week. Why don't I believe this? Oh yeah, it's because in three years of bill collecting I've never met a collector that would respond this way. Even if the collector were wrong, they'd make you prove it in court. Collectors talk to lots of people that say they're lawyers and say they know the law. They learn fast that 99% of them are lying, and the other 1% would still have to prove their case to win, assuming there was a case to prove. That couldn't be further from the truth. Fear and ignorance are the number one reasons for not paying a debt. As a collector, my goal was to break through the fear and have an honest conversation with the debtor. Once I did that, there was almost always something that could be worked out that made everyone happy.
Re: Re: Bad, bad gut instinct I think you're really over-thinking this. Collection Agencies don't make long term plans like this. They would much rather have their money now. If they're not pursisuing this right now, chances are the reason is purely administrative, and has nothing to do with strategy, Which is good for you. They may never get around to it. RMA is a huge collection agency, they handle a lot of debt for a number of large clients. This attorney is a small client to them, which means low priority. Honestly I think your best option is to file the complaint with the state bar. So what if it does take years? Your goal is to protect yourself from being sued, not to win the complaint. I'm not an attorney and it may be worth a few bucks to consult one on this, but it seems to me that it would be really hard to get a judgment if this attorney can't prove you owe the money because the complaint hasn't been resolved. In fact, it may be a good strategy to make sure the complaint process takes you past the statute of limitations.
Re: Re: Re: Bad, bad gut instinct I was going to put the same question to you, Bill. Except the reason she thought she might have a judgment against her was because she saw the account listed twice on the credit report. Explaining how judgments show up on credit reports should relieve that fear. Since that was her only reason for thinking she might have a judgment, talking about how sometimes they may or may not show up only increases her fear. Something she doesn't need. How come you didn't think to tell her the second entry wasn't a judgment? Hmmm. Most people that know about credit know that those 100 word statements are useless. In fact, if you check the creditnet library, they say they are the first things that should be removed from the credit report.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Bad, bad gut instin Mycroft, I can understand your thinking and the reasons behind your taunts. The fallacey is that I'm not going to give you but one chance to make a settlement and if you don't take it you would find yourself with that day off. And it would not be just one day off either. It would be at least two or three. There would be a day or two in discovery and then another day or two in court. Whatever it takes. I'm not about to waste my time with idle threats and fat lip yik yak. I'm going to have the proof of it and I'm going to force you to admit it in discovery if at all possible. I'm going to be asking the questions and you are going to answer them or wish you had. I don't play screw around games. If I say I'm going to do it that's exactly what I'm going to do and unlike those whom you have probably dealt with who would have had to pay a lawyer, I don't. If I ask you in discovery before a court reporter whether or not you validated the debt when you and I both know you didn't then what are you going to say? Are you going to lie with a court reporter sitting right there taking notes and your answers being tape recorded to boot? If I ask you in discovery before a court reporter whether or not you violated a lawful cease & desist order and I have a letter from you signed by you stating that you did then what are you going to do? You going to try to lie out of it? Wouldn't surprise me any if you did. And if I don't have you cold, I'm not going to get stupid enough to threaten to do that which I cannot do. And why don't I answer the rest of your post? Because it isn't worth the time and trouble.
Re: Re: Re: Bad, bad gut instinct Mycroft said: That just goes to show what most of the creditnet library is worth. Ludicrous validation letters, estoppel letters that have no basis in law and are nothing but junk theories and telling people that if one validation letter don't work then try the next dozen?? Properly done, a 100 word or less statement can be a very powerful tool in getting stuff removed or mitigated. That is, however, good advice for people who don't know how to use them correctly. In most cases where a 100 word statement is appropriately and properly used it will get rid of the listing and will never get printed. Only problem is that in most cases the 100 word statement won't work so it normally should not be used. But if one learns how to use it there are those times when it will get the listing deleted in a heartbeat. If one mis-uses it then it will hurt. Your posting makes it obvious that you don't know anything about 100 word statements or how to use them to get listings removed. My students learn how to use them if they need to know.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bad, bad gut instin That seems to contradict what you said before. Let me quote it for you. So you talk like you've done this stuff a thousand times, but previously you said you've never had to do it. Your descriptuon of the discovery process sounds really scary, until you look at it closely. You presume that the collector has either done a bunch of bad things or failed to do things they need to do. You seem to have a basic misunderstanding of how collection agencies work. Mostly, you assume that everything is handled by the same guy. It may work that way with the small outfits, but not at any of the places I worked. I was paid to collect, not answer the mail. That means I'm not worried about your questions about cease and desist letters or validation requests. In fact, the office I worked out of didn't even get mail, all that was sent somewhere else. In the three years I was a collector, I never called on an account that had a cease and desist or an active dispute on it.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Bad, bad gut instinct I looked through it, it seemed pretty solid to me. Really? Because in a previous post you said: Then you go on to say: Okay, so how has it helped you to get your tax lien removed? You know, you make all these vague claims and don't say anything to back them up. If these things really are useful, why not say how? Do any of these students of yours use this board? Would any of them be willing to give a testamonial? If a potential student asked for a list of referals, would you provide it?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bad, bad gut in Mycroft, your ignorance and failure to uderstand is almost beyond human comprehension. Up to now that is correct. Looks like that may change in the near future. Too soon to tell yet. When I say that I have never done it that is the truth. I've never done it personally for myself on any debt that I personally owed. Now then, do you need Paul Harvey? Par for the course. No, I don't assume anything. I leave that to experts such as yourself. In 3 years time?? You make it sound as though they probably all run you off before you did them some real harm. I don't care about that either. If you break the law then I am going to sue you personally for your violations not your company. I won't really be interested in what somebody else in the company you work for did or did not do. If in discovery you want to implicate others then that's okay too. But the only question is going to be what did you do, not what somebody else did or did not do. That will come later. I can believe that. Makes perfect sense to me. Working at a bunch of places in three years would mean that none of them ever got you trained enough to do any good. Now we can all understand why you make some of the comments you make. An expert in 3 years!!! Indeed!!!!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Bad, bad gut instin You bet they do. They do it all the time. NVBONEDOC just did a few posts back but I guess you were so busy trying to make yourself look like an expert that it sailed right over your head. And he isn't the only one by a long shot. While you have been trying to impress everybody with how smart you are there have been at least two others who did so as well. Obviously you failed to notice those as well. No! In the first place if I did that then I would be violating the privacy of others. In the second place people can see for themselves whether I know what I am talking about or not just like they can tell whether you know what you are talking about or not. Seems to me you have not yet figured out that people in this forum are not stupid.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bad, bad gut in I feel like saying, "I am rubber, you are glue..." Maybe I do need Paul Harvey. You say you have never done it for yourself, does that mean you have done it for your students? How many times have you done this for your students? No, you're trying to make it sound that way. Three years as a top collector, perfect FDCPA compliance. Let me take a moment to take a step back and look at the larger picture. When we started this, it was because you said the collector was breaking 5 or 6 laws just by calling you. When I challenge you on that, we discover that what you really meant is if you've done a cease and desist letter and a validation request first. Supposedly it's those violations that's going to force the creditor to clean the credit report. Don't you think it's risky to recomend a strategy that depends on specific actions from your opponent? If your opponent doesn't follow your plan, what then? Lol! It's not brain surgery, it's collections. How long does a person need to work in the field before they know what they're talking about? And if three years isn't enough time to learn anything, how long do you have to work with your students?
Re: Bad, bad gut in TIME OUT!! I was pretty sure it wasn't a judgment, I feel that putting the word Default in one of the entry's titles (RMA vs. RMA - Default) makes it look that way. And while I know that most people are smart enough to know that judgements are found in the public records section, not everyone is. How many loans have I been turned down for because someone thought this was a judgement? Is there a law as to how collectors can title themselves in the CRs? I searched the FCRA and the FCDPA and couldn't find anything but I have admit a lot of it is greek to me. Answer my question first then you can go back to fighting. :+)
Re: Bad, bad gut in One last thing... I think because RMA put default in their second entry that they intended to list the account twice. If that's true that would be a BIG violation.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bad, bad gu Lol! Like anything else, there are those who never learn. However long it takes. Couple of months? next 5 years? Next 10 years? Who cares? It makes no difference to me. I've still got people who were among the first students I ever had who are still keeping up on the updates as they become available just in case they ever need them in the future. Several of them are attorneys and real estate people who use what I teach in their professions so they need to keep up with the latest developments. Once they have paid the price whatever it might have been at the time they get unlimited updates and "tech support" for as long as I'm alive to give it to them. In this day and age what was new yesterday is old hat and needs updating today and probably will again tomorrow. Figuratively speaking at least. The only guarantee we have in life is that things are going to change.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bad, bad gu Sorry about that mycroft but those are your words right there. I didn't invent the statement, you made the statement of your own free will. Right there.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bad, ba Ok. Good idea. NO! NO! NO! NO, mycroft, NO! That is not what I said at all. You just failed to understand what I did say and as a result of your failure to understand what you read you come up with yet another wrong conclusion. I said that it is possible for a collector to commit as many as 5 or 6 violations in the first couple of phone calls. I didn't say he would have broken 5 or 6 laws. Let me illustrate the point. Let us suppose that near your home in a residential district you have a stop sign. Let us say that you run that stop sign 5 or 6 times. Have you broken 5 or 6 different laws? Let us say that there are 2 stop signs a block apart. And you run them both 3 times. Did you break 5 or 6 different laws? You need to train yourself to understand what you read. Or is it that you are trying to speed read? Yep! I just got to give you the benefit of the doubt. Speed reading can really lead you astray sometimes. Happens all the time. Lots of people have posted testimony to that fact. I don't count on that happening however. Same with that dumb estoppel letter. Lots of folks have testified right here on creditnet that it worked for them and the collector just threw up his hands and sent it back to the OC or got real dumb and sold it to some other collector after they got the estoppel letter. Its really hilarious when that happens but it does happen a lot more than one might think. What difference do you think it makes whether he does or he don't? Got him either way no matter what he does. The only way he can escape is to throw up his hands and refuse to collect and return it to the original creditor like the law says he can do at any time. But he had best do that real quick or he will end up getting hung anyway. Creditwrench is a lot like Tar Baby. If you are Brer Fox you will get stuck to it every time it touches you. You say you had a perfect FDCPA record. I don't doubt that statement even a little bit. After all, its just like those stop signs I spoke of earlier. I've seen stop signs out in the country where you could see in all directions for half a mile either way. Farmers would ignore it and go blasting through it endlessly. Had one like that half a mile from where I grew up as a kid. Gravel roads, 4 way stops and we had one farmer who normally drove down through the country side doing 100 MPH or better sometimes. Right through those stop signs he would go and never even slow down. Often several times a day. He had a clean driving record for years until they caught him one day.
