Hi first time on hope someone can help. i had a cc fron MBNA now a law firm CA. on my most recent CR it shows this account with a 0 balance Equfax/ but $1739 on experian. how should i handle the law firm who show the balance to be $2320.72. on my CR it shows current status as charged off and trasferred or sold. i did try to repay this loan in 2003 made 6 payments of $50. but stopped in JAN. of 2004. what should i do with this problem. thanks
Never read the fine print. There ain't no way you're going to like it. Pay close attention to validation post in my links below. Send The CA the validation letter.
The law firm may very well be Wolpoff & Abramson. Maybe Mann Bracken. Either one is likely to demand arbitration. You will lose the arbitration and they will be granted an award. The next thing they will be likely to do is to reduce it to a judgment in your home county. After that they can and usually demand garnishment of your bank accounts, wages, maybe put a lien on your house if you have one, maybe take your car if it is free and clear and worth anything. They can force you to go to court and bring your last few years income tax records, your bank statements, your car titles and just about anything else they can think of. If you refuse to cooperate or fail to go to court they can throw you in jail until you do cooperate. You can demand validation as lbrown has suggested but that will probably do you little good unless you know how to take them to court and sue them because you won't be very likely to find a lawyer that will help you. I would suggest that you try to arrange payments with them before they force you to arbitration and once you make payment arrangements be sure not to miss any of them. Stop worrying about your credit reports and start worrying about getting a judgment against you. Pay what you owe and your credit reports will take care of themselves. I don't blame you for wanting to get the inaccuracies off your credit reports. This board will teach you how to do that very well but much more important than that is doing something about the debt and doing what you can to prevent a judgment against you. If you get a judgment against you that will be a lot worse to have on your credit reports.
Re: Re: CA Problem Howens12 - Do NOT listen to KayKay. She just revealed herself as a CREDIT AGENCY. She is telling you this garbage to scare you. Others here will give you sound advice and believe me, there is MANY great people here. I'm new here also but I promise you, there are truly good folks here. Shanyl
Re: Re: Re: CA Problem Yes, I am a CA but that is no reason to scare anyone. Yes, there are many great people here who will give sound advice. What I said is not garbage. It happens when debtors ignore court summons and think it will just go away. Very few ever go to jail but it can happen.
Re: Re: Re: CA Problem Shanyl: There is a reason why dunning letters from lawyers are implied threats of legal action. THAT IS WHAT LAWYERS DO. That is why courts have ruled that if a Law Firm or a Lawyer sign with a facsimile signature, they could be sued immediately for threatening legal action when it is not permissible, or not what they normally would do for an account (like the one being dunned for). I know someone who received a first dunning notice from a law firm allegedly representing NCO, which claimed that "no decision has been as to whether to file suit against you at this time" for an amount which is under $50. Despite the account being post-SOL, and for such a small amount that they would lose money by filing. And that letter didn't even have a facsimile signature. The logic used by the court is that when a law firm sends a letter, there is a presumption that the lawyer has actually PERSONALLY REVIEWED the file, and has PERSONALLY DECIDED that legal action will be appropriate for the file as they have reviewed it. Any time the letter is from a lawyer, (or a CRA notation on the trade line says that the CA may be a lawyer) you want to take everything as a threat of legal action, because it is. To the most unsophisticated consumers, LAWYERS SUE! That's their job. Yes, lawyers do other things, but their primary function is to sue. What KayKay said is accurate. That is why default judgements are a major problem. Even if they do take it to arbitration, and you lose (since its stacked to their favor), challenge them getting that converted to a judgement in your county. Make them prove it in person to the judge. And make them prove every penny of the amount that they are claiming is owed.
*: CA Problem The logic used by the court is that when a law firm sends a letter, there is a presumption that the lawyer has actually PERSONALLY REVIEWED the file, and has PERSONALLY DECIDED that legal action will be appropriate for the file as they have reviewed it. jam237 =============== This is where kay kay 29s boyfriend went wrong and got sued twice for $100000 each time. Instead of placing the fault where it belongs, on her boyfriend she wants to blame everybody else including the bank for his mistake. Never read the fine print. There ain't no way you're going to like it.
Re: *: CA Problem Not true, lbrown. He didn't get sued for FDCPA the first time. The FDCPA case hasn't been heard yet. And that case isn't about what you think it is.
Re: Re: Re: Re: CA Problem It is very true that arbitration is stacked against you and you will normally lose. Challengeing them getting that converted to a judgment in your county isn't nearly enough. You would have to be provably active as soon as you receive notice of arbitration and you would have to deny having agreed to arbitration to the arbitration company. And that would only be the first thing you would have to do. You would also have to do what jam237 said and demand strict proof of the debt from the arbitration company. Even that may not be enough to make them stop. You would probably have to fight them in your local court too. Once they get the arbitration they will attempt to reduce it to a judgment by claiming that the matter is res judicata. That means they claim that it has already been settled by the arbitration board and there is no matter of dispute before the court. There are also other things that you must claim if at all possible. You can try to claim that they changed or tried to change the conditions of the original agreement by sending you a second agreement saying that by using their card after receiving the new agreement you have agreed to arbitration in the event of any disagreement. Agreements once made cannot be changed like that. That can work on cards that have been opened over two years ago but most of the newer ones will already have that clause in them so that argument won't work. Cleaning up your credit by disputing with the credit bureaus is just fine but you also need to think about the fact that if a CA is going to sue you then they don't care about your credit reports or that you used some trick or other to repair your credit.
Re: Re: CA Problem Don't you just wish it were so simple as that? Arbitration is not something just dreamed up by some creditors or collection agencies. Arbitration is perfectly legal, authorized by law and sanctioned by the courts. You can't just wish them out of existance.
Re: Re: CA Problem they don't care about your credit reports or that you used some trick or other to repair your credit. K====================K ================ So now it's not the law it's the trick. Never read the fine print. There ain't no way you're going to like it.
Re: Re: Re: CA Problem And fortunately for all of us here on CN, so is the FDCPA and FCRA. No tricks here!!!
Re: Re: Re: CA Problem KK just how many creditors want to subpoena their debtors to court? most just want a quick default judgment. you said summons that is different the law from what I know does not require that a person appear fopr a summons unless they choose to protect their own legal rights. now with a subpoena thats different . are you speaking in terms to appear for examination to produce records? that I can see facing jail for ignoring. if a consumer files an action and thh creditor files an counter suit and fails to comply they may face sanctions as well as loose. threatening that a cosnumer could face jail for not appearing on a summons could costs you big $ you should read the laws more carefully or you may be the next one that a consumer files suit against.
Re: Re: Re: Re: CA Problem in regards to summons the only summons i know that could possibly result in jail if you ignore it is for failng to appear for jury duty and even in that case you may only be fined but who would risk that.
