Stumbled across this board while surfing for advice on how to get rid of a CA (Asset Acceptance LLC) that first wrote May 7, 2003 asking me to pay a CC debt which was charged off by OC 6/10/95 (last active 10/31/94). OC is First Bankcard Center. I sent a letter disputing the alleged debt and asking for proof of same. CA's response was letter with a computer printout, as many of you have mentioned. I could use some guidance as to what letter #2 should say. I was thinking of sending a slightly modified version of the "Thank you for your recent inquiry. This is not a refusal to pay, but a notice that your claim is being disputed. This is a request for validation made pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Please complete and return the attached disclosure request form..." I know that this alleged debt is too old for OC to report, but the CA's 1st letter read like a bill and they have likely listed this on my CR, but I haven't checked them yet. Please, any advice is welcome. Thanks in advance.
Personally, who cares if they validate? It's out of statute. Send a letter saying the alleged debt is timebared and never contact me about this matter again. By all means, check the credit reports. If they've re-aged, sue them!
Since the original poster didn't mention which state they live in, and which state the debt was incurred in, we have no way of knowing if the statute of limitations has expired on the debt. It is 15 years in some cases. Maybe their screen name means that they live in Texas, or maybe it doesn't. So, suing the collector might be a bad idea. You might open up a can of worms you cannot close.
I bear no ill-will toward Asset Acceptance, they offered me a pretty sweet deal ($0.50 per $1.00) but they caught me after the SOL too. I just didn't know any better, and didn't get a deletion. Check your SOL on open-ended accounts, then you'll know if you have to worry. And it should not show up on your CR unless they've re-aged it. The 7 year reporting (according to the info you've provided) period has ended.
too much, A credit card is an open account as defined by the Truth In Lending Act. Only Rhode Island and, Wyoming have an SOL past 6 years on open acounts.
Re: Re: CA bought 8-1/2 yr old debt Yes. However, since the poster didn't name their state, and they may have used the "CC" term loosely, it's impossible to answer the question without more information. Mabye they live in RI or WY? Maybe the "CC" debt is actually a closed-end installment contract with First Bankcard Center... they used to do closed-end installment lending in the 90's, working with electronics stores, furniture retailers, etc, in addition to their regular MC/V business. You can't just shout "sue them" without knowing all the facts.
Re: Re: CA bought 8-1/2 yr old debt It is a fact that derogatory info must fall of your credit report at the 7 year mark and it is illegal to reage. The SOl for wy. is 8 years and R.I. is 10 years. Very doubtful the poster is a R.I. resident. I've found that people on this site actually know the difference between a credit card and an installment loan.
Re: Re: CA bought 8-1/2 yr old debt Reply to All who responded to my posting...WOW Thanks for your input! I live in Texas. The alleged debt was a Mastercard issued by First Bankcard Center in 1994 while I lived in Illinois. So what to do about this? Is there a good existing letter somewhere? I need to respond before end June. Thanks so much.
Re: Re: CA bought 8-1/2 yr old debt I revert to my previous post. Tell them to Kiss your a$$ and check your credit report.
I don't think anyone answered this. Whether the bought it, were assigned it, or some fairy dropped the debt in their lap, they still have to use your DOLA from the OC. Out of SOL - pound sand and cry about it.
Re: Re: Re: CA bought 8-1/2 yr old debt Absolutely!! Nothing else matters, unless you are in WI!! Are you? Maybe in WI?? If you are, then what they are doing is illegal. check your credit reports, you may have money coming to you.
Re: Re: Re: CA bought 8-1/2 yr old debt LOL, Better yet, save the time and postage. Just ignore them. Keep the letters tho. hehehehe
Thanks All, everyone is so helpful with advice. As to Butch's last bit...I feel compelled to reply even if it is only to say "Kiss my grits!" Call it superstition...like they could say..."the person did not respond so we can construe that as tacit agreement/acceptance..." So here is my proposed reply letter to CA's non-validation-computer-printout-letter: CERTIFIED RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED, # 7002 3150 0001 7126 6368 June 20, 2003 Tamika Wright Asset Acceptance LLC PO Box 2036 Warren, MI 48090-2036 Re: Account # 1503907-153-TAB / First Bankcard Center 5411 179000 908875/ mine and my [now] late husband's name Again I dispute this above-referenced alleged debt; it is not mine. You have not validated your claim by providing me with competent evidence that I have some contractual obligation to pay you. A computer printout from your company is not sufficient evidence. In addition, the statutes of limitations to report or collect on this account have passed. ======== unquote======= Does anyone have an opinion or objection to this? As always, thank you.
