I have a BK from August 1995. In the BK filing, there is one account (a gas card) shown as "redeem/reaffirm" and now shows up on my CR as a collection account and I got a CA letter. My question is this: I never had the chance to reaffirm the debt because in early September 1995 the OC sent me a letter after I filed saying that I could not use the account any longer because of my decision to file BK. Given that, and that my BK was discharged, can the CA try to collect? I never signed anything with the OC because they sent this letter... I'm trying to find any angle I can to delete this account. It showed up as a charge off until I disputed it - now it shows up as a collection account. I am having the CA validate now, but if they do I want to have all possible avenues thought out.
Oooo - that's bad. If you have reaffirmed your debt in a BK, you can't come back and just say it was included. You may be able to get your BK amended, (Not sure, but depending on your state might be possible), but the cost could be prohibitive. One thing you might want to do is to write the CRAs and tell them that the account was included in your bk and see if they will change the listing at least.
Dont you have to also sign something with the OC to reaffirm? I filed on 08/18/1995. I got a letter from the OC on 09/05/1995 saying sorry, your account is now closed because of the BK. Would I have had to go back and change my paperwork at that point so it didn't read "redeem/reaffirm" to make it "included in BK"? I'm pretty sure I can get them on validation but this would have been an easier way out.
Yes, however, pre 12/97 debts go by the "charge off date", not the original delinquency + 180 days. I need to finance two autos next year and I don't want this collection on there - it looks worse than the original charge off. I just need to determine if I actually needed to sign something with the OC to reaffirm or is including a "Statement of Intention" in my BK filing enough to screw it all up for me, even though the OC canceled my account before the BK was dischaged in 12/95. You're right, I can wait for it to fall off but I'd rather use the BK or have them validate than wait another 8 months, especially considering the fact that I need to use my credit soon....
In researching the US Code, I think I found the answer. USC 524(c) discusses an agreement that I never filed. I only filed a Statement of Intention with my paperwork - the OC canceled my account 3 months before the discharge and only 3 weeks after filing. I post only to inform others if you're in this boat. I'm going to confirm but this is what I take away from this... =========== BKTITLE 11 > CHAPTER 5 > SUBCHAPTER II > Sec. 524. - Effect of discharge (c) An agreement between a holder of a claim and the debtor, the consideration for which, in whole or in part, is based on a debt that is dischargeable in a case under this title is enforceable only to any extent enforceable under applicable nonbankruptcy law, whether or not discharge of such debt is waived, only if - (1) such agreement was made before the granting of the discharge under section 727, 1141, 1228, or 1328 of this title; (2) (A) such agreement contains a clear and conspicuous statement which advises the debtor that the agreement may be rescinded at any time prior to discharge or within sixty days after such agreement is filed with the court, whichever occurs later, by giving notice of rescission to the holder of such claim; and (B) such agreement contains a clear and conspicuous statement which advises the debtor that such agreement is not required under this title, under nonbankruptcy law, or under any agreement not in accordance with the provisions of this subsection; (3) such agreement has been filed with the court and, if applicable, accompanied by a declaration or an affidavit of the attorney that represented the debtor during the course of negotiating an agreement under this subsection, which states that - (A) such agreement represents a fully informed and voluntary agreement by the debtor; (B) such agreement does not impose an undue hardship on the debtor or a dependent of the debtor; and (C) the attorney fully advised the debtor of the legal effect and consequences of - (i) an agreement of the kind specified in this subsection; and (ii) any default under such an agreement;
Sassy, thx for the feedback - that is what I thought. A "Statement of Intention" does not mean I have reaffirmed the debt. And, since the OC beat me to the punch and sent a letter stating they canceled my card 2 months before the discharge back in 95, I think I'm going to send a copy of the discharge and numbered list of creditors to this scumbag CA and indicate they are in vioation of the discharge order and to remove their tradelines from my CRs...then I'll only have the public record left which falls off in three years. I feel unethical in trying to get the BK itself removed - it is mine....
millerm, I think that's a good idea. I don't think it's a matter of ethics to follow a legal process that allows for inaccuracies to be corrected. I agree, a BK is a BK and there are reporting laws applicable to it specifically. For whatever reason you chose to go forward with the BK (me too, btw) in the end it still is a decision we made and there are consequences that go with it. You are being responsible in living with the consequences of your BK, why do we feel bad when using a process that allows and INSISTS that the information be reported correctly. The decision to delete a BK tradeline or the BK entry itself isn't one that we are making -- it's part of the process. Afterall, if the BK itself and/or the tradelines showing as "included in BK' were accurate and complete, verifiable in the first place, we wouldn't be here at all. We didn't create the reporting system, we are only a part of it, and there are rules that govern that system because it has such an impact on our lives -- most especially when the reporting is done badly. I will live with the decision I made in filing C13 but I nonetheless expect it and all that was associated with it to be reported correctly, as the law mandates -- anything less than that, defeats the purpose of my having decided to pursue BK in the first place. Should there come a time when that happens, then I will be a happy camper indeed! Sassy
Sassy, I totally agree with you. I have an issue with the "included in BK" items showing up on my report past 08/18/02, the 7 year anniversary. That is why this one needs to fall and I had to clarify the process of "reaffirming" before sending this out. I was going down a path of validation but it doesn't seem that I need to. I have seen some threads regarding removing a BK public record, and going through the process of ensuring the address that it is associated with is removed from all CRs and then dispute the BK as "not mine". That is what I disagree with. Believe me you, I'd love to have that removed as I'm sure you would too. It's a lot easier these days and my credit is in pretty good shape (just closed 1 year ago on a $500K house) but the first few years were terrible. Avoiding it is best but as you said, we made our decisions. I appreciate your feedback Sassy! You confirmed what I had thought. Now I'm going to get that discharge and the numbered list to the CA so they can delete these tradelines. Then all I have is the public record - everything else is clean. Mark
