Discussion in 'Credit Talk' started by etheral, Sep 4, 2003.

  1. etheral

    etheral Well-Known Member

    Which and Where is the letter for CA's when they don't add "consumer disputes". And what are the procedures prior to that? Thank You again.
  2. etheral

    etheral Well-Known Member

  3. etheral

    etheral Well-Known Member

    What letter do I use when a CA doesn't add "consumer disputes"?
  4. Butch

    Butch Well-Known Member

    Hi Etheral,

    Actually I don't think there is a specific letter. But we can make one if you like.

    Usually we reserve this violation as one of the violations we include in a suit if the need arises. If you send them a letter stating they need to correct it, you'll give them a chance to fix the issue and you'll lose it.

    You don't really want them to correct the problem do you?

    What's your case background?

  5. etheral

    etheral Well-Known Member

    I sent a validation letter to a CA & OC stating 1692e(8), waited until I got the green card back and then disputed with bureaus. Neither CA or OC validated- I know OC doesn't have to respond. Both came back verified but did not say "consumer disputes".

    Can you assist me with a letter?
  6. etheral

    etheral Well-Known Member

  7. Butch

    Butch Well-Known Member

    Of course I'll help you Etheral.

    There is some basic stuff we need to know, like:

    How much are they claiming you owe?
    What state are you in now AND at the time of the app, (if there is one)
    How long ago did you make the last payment?
    Who's the CA and what state are they in?

    I don't know if this thread applies or not but Jezy brought up a similar issue, in that you do need to dispute with the CRA before you can develop an FCRA case against a DF. (Not to be confused with an FDCPA case tho) :)


    If you're not comfy with putting all this on the board that's understandable.


  8. Butch

    Butch Well-Known Member

    My email is always ON.

  9. etheral

    etheral Well-Known Member


    OC(CAPITAL ONE) =$2467/LAST AVTIVITY = 12-1997

    I disputed with CRA'S and sent OC and CA Validation letters. They never added "consumer disputes".
  10. etheral

    etheral Well-Known Member

    I now reside in Maryland.

    I lived in Washington DC when I obtained Cap. 1

    I lived in Mississippi when I obtained Heilig Meyers.
  11. etheral

    etheral Well-Known Member

  12. etheral

    etheral Well-Known Member

  13. Butch

    Butch Well-Known Member

  14. etheral

    etheral Well-Known Member

    Butch my friend, What does the statue of limitations have to do with "consumer disputes"? What does it have to do with getting a CA or OC on a violation of not reporting "consumer disputes"?
  15. Butch

    Butch Well-Known Member

    Edit: Moved down here for continuity;

    The point was to see if you could have your "left one" in a ringer as far as getting sued for the balances. We try to FIRST determine if we are still within the SOL's to see if we are waking up any sleeping giants before we do anything.

    But you're right. The SOL has nothing to do with validation. But NOW ya know you can do pretty much anything you want, now that you're a smart consumer. :)


    I don't know how ya did it Etheral but in all 3 states the SOL for BOTH "Written" AND "Open Accounts" is 3 years. Damn, you must have planned that. hahahaha

    Your Cap 1 is an open account. Your accounts become delinquent on, (according to Crofttk's definition) the day after the first date you failed to make your payment, culminating in a charge-off.

    That means if your DLA for HM, is 8/2000, the SOL expires on 9/2003. Here's the problem; you don't know whether it's the FIRST day of Sept, or the LAST day. So to be on the safe side, we shouldn't assume the expiration of the SOL until 10/01/2003.

    Cap 1 is certainly beyond the SOL.

    Now all this means is that they can't SUCCESSFULLY sue you for the balance, but does NOT mean they won't try.

    The SOL's also have nothing to do with the 7 year reporting period. So we'll have an issue to deal with here to get the TL's removed.

    Heilig Meyers, btw, is bankrupt. Not only would they be unable to validate anyway, they probably can't find their respective butt's with both hands.

    Well ... as you know, you can't develope an FCRA case against a DF until you first dispute through the CRA's. Now that you've done that we know we need to take it easy for a couple weeks yet, lets lay low and wait until the CRA results come back in. I suspect HM may be deleted anyway, and ... well we'll just have to see about Cap 1.

    Whatcha think?

  16. etheral

    etheral Well-Known Member

    Butch I really appreciate this. Really! Didn't know that H. Meyers was Bankrupt.

    The results came back already and HMeyers came off of TR and EX. Equifax verified but with no "consumer disputes".

    Cap 1 deleted off of EQ an EX. Transunion verified.
  17. Butch

    Butch Well-Known Member


    Now we're gettin somehwere. Tell me what was the basis for your Disputes to the CRA's?

    AND, what was the basis (not that you need one) for your demands for validation?

    Was it "not mine", and "not mine", respectively?
  18. etheral

    etheral Well-Known Member

    Yes, both not mine.
  19. Butch

    Butch Well-Known Member

    Heilig Meyers, btw, have usually been collected by one of the OSI groups of companies.

    OSI, Perimeter Credit, oh... there's like about 10 of em.

    They ALL fold fairly easily. Lets hope it stays that way.

    We also want to "double check" these SOL's, just to be sure.

    Why Chat's site is very reliable, but NONE of us are right 100% of the time.

  20. Butch

    Butch Well-Known Member

    Interesting Web Site they have now.


    Thursday, April 12, 2001
    Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal


    Bankrupt Heilig-Meyers announces plans to sell assets, close stores by summer


    RICHMOND, Va. -- Heilig-Meyers Co., the furniture store that survived the Great Depression, said Wednesday it will close the company's remaining 375 namesake stores, affecting as many as 3,750 jobs, and focus on its RoomStores.

    There are four Heilig-Meyer's stores in Nevada: two in Las Vegas, one in Henderson and one in Reno. When the liquidation is finished, all of the approximately 40 Nevada employees will be terminated.

    The retailer is negotiating with a liquidation company to sell the remaining inventory at its namesake stores and to help close the stores by mid- to late summer. Spokeswoman Ann Julsen said the agreement with an as-yet unnamed liquidator should close by next week.

    Heilig-Meyers filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in August and has closed 418 stores since then. Documents filed with the court at that time listed the company assets at $1.4 billion and liabilities at $836 million.

Share This Page