As I have started to dissect my credit situation, I noticed that I have the following situation. I have an original creditor reporting a charge-off. Then it was apparently purchased by Sherman Acquisitions. And now I have four separate collection agencies that have tried to collect the debt for Sherman Acquisitions as follows: Mar./April 2003 â?? Risk Management Alternatives Sept/Oct 2003 â?? Alegis Group LP (appears to be part of Sherman Acq.) Dec. 2003 â?? Capital Management Services Inc. April/May 2004 - Financial Recovery Services On my credit reports, the OC charge-off is showing as well as Sherman Acquisitions. None of the other collection agencies appear except for a recent inquiry by Financial Recovery Services. Has anyone else had this kind of situation before? I believe that this is an open collection that I have not settled or paid on although I need to research to be sure because I was sure I had paid everything off except for one item. Should I validate with the last CA only since I havenâ??t had any recent correspondence from the others? Should I also validate with Sherman Acquisitions? Also should I dispute original OC charge-off as not mine?
Yep, thats common place now adays. #1) did one of the CA's contact you within the past 30 days for the first time? If yes, I would send to them, *AND* to Sherman the same validation letter at the same time. In the Sherman letter you want to emphasize that this is based on the first communication from XXX on their behalf, dated xx/xx/xxxx. Chances are they'll keep pulling the account and shopping around for a new CA until they give up. Do you know if the account is outside of the SOL?
jam I'm trying to now help my friend with her credit situation on to bigger and better things yikes ! anyhow your above post is exactually the same situation she is dealing with. both Ca are listed on her CR and one has the other collecting for them. both CA verified the same debt with the CRA and refuse to take it off, I know one TL has to go but which one? neither will show proof that they have the legal authority to collect. another interesting point is niether of the CA's are register with the SOS so that may be a good angle to pursue what do you think? fun
Fun: Unfortunately, neither has to go from the report. It is an identical situation to when an OC assigns a CA to the account, both can report the information in its entirity. Because the OC still owns the account, and the CA still has the same account, it is still technically accurate because both do have the account, even though they are the same account. In this case, CA #1 (if they purchased the debt owns the account; it will be trickier if they were only assigned, because then the assignment contract would have to specify that they have the authority to assign subsequent assignees), they assigned the account to CA #2 who as long as they still are assigned the account, they too have the rights to collect on it. Yes, they are the same account, but as long as both CA's have the rights to it, they can have it on your report. However, you could always try to interlock disputes to both CA's with disputes to all the CRA's, and see if they can come off that way.
jam if one CA originally had the acct and reassigned it to another how can they legally verify an acct that they have no legal authority to collect? I would think this would be a violation under the FCRA.and definately the FDCPA. its like a double jeopardy kinda thing. CA abz states 50$ due to ICU CA doc states 50$ due to ICU my point is that the acct is listed with both agencies how can they both have the acct at the same time to verify it with the CRA? but it came back verified lol so after writing both CA and demanding validation only one responds and the other ignores you even though they verified the acct with the CRA. in this case would you say an ITS would be appropriate?
When CA #1, assigns CA #2 to collect on an account for CA #1, CA #1 is still the *OWNER* of the account, so they do in fact still have the authority over the account. If they *SELL* the account to CA #2, *THEN* CA #1 no longer has authority over the account. If they are assigned, both the assigner and the assignee have legitimate authority over the account.
Jam I concur , but how can both CA list the same acct at the same time on your CR and verify that it shall remain . it then appears that both ca are collecting the same debt.
In this case both are still collecting on the same account, CA #1 just hired CA #2 to do the actual collecting work. Just like when an OC has assigned the account to a CA, both the OC & CA can list the account identically. It's the same account, but they both have the rights to it. The OC will probably tell you that they can't take the payment from you directly, because you need to pay the CA, but the debt is still owed to the OC. The important thing is whether or not they have an account for you with that information, and unfortunately, in this situation, both do...
