Re: Re: Re: CA refuses to speak to me The CA said "You are due FOR" not "You are due" that changes the meaning slightly, and probably enough to be interpreted as 'your account is now due for almost $5000" That's my read on it!
Re: Re: Re: CA refuses to speak to me I read it the same way--the CA is saying you owe $5K, not that they owe you.
Re: Re: Re: CA refuses to speak to me Yes, he means I am liable for the 5k. It's not just once, but several times during the talk he mentions how much $ I allegedly owe. I think this point is moot, unfortunately. I did speak to a lawyer, recently. He advised the contract is not valid on some points, but asks that I participate in a class action lawsit against this creditor and others who have the same contract. He said that he cannot reveal what it is that is not valid until I retain him as counsel? Sounds like I am being pulled into some grey area. This is a tough decision to make, but I need to act quickly because of my mortgage app. Apparently the broker advised lenders don't like this collection, even though my scores are all around 700 and only have < 20% util to credit limit ratio with the collection included (and it's only on one CR)? The wife's score is even higher and totally clean. I have virtually no debt otherwise between me and the wife. The lender is saying my interest rate will be somewhere around 7.75% on a 2-year ARM? That sounds outrageous to me. IS this right? Thanks
Re: Re: Re: CA refuses to speak to me wheaty is the class action suit against the OC or the CA? can you disclose the name ? maybe others on here may be dealing with the same co and may want to be included in this suit as well.
Re: Re: Re: CA refuses to speak to me fun: Since the contract itself is what is illegal, the class action lawsuit would be with the OC. wheaty: Chances are there are a *LOT* of things illegal about the contract. Companies typically stack the contracts in their favor, and try to get away with what isn't legal, hoping that the consumer will not catch on. If you want, I could help you try to find out any information which is available on this company in specific. (You can e-mail.) Chances are there is a lot of public information available on the internet about the company. Or, if you have a copy of the contract, and want to compare the contract with a FTC settlement, which sounds like its VERY similar to your situation, you could go to the Federal Trade Commission web site FTC v. Leasecomm Corporation/Microfinancial Corp. http://www.ftc.gov/ro/leasecomm/ The complaint walks through their companies contract, and illustrates why many of the provision of their contract was illegal. You may even strike paydirt if you search the FTC web site for the name of the company, they may have had enough FTC complaints to have action brought against them by the FTC. Also at the FTC web site, you may be able to do a Freedom of Information Act request on the company to get copies of any complaints which the FTC has received about this company.
Re: Re: Re: CA refuses to speak to me fun: There are times when actually posting the name of the company is bad. This would be one of them. If you want to know why, check out the complaint against Leasecomm Corporation filed by the FTC. One of the MAJOR charges against them, is a wide-spread campaign of misinformation on public forums which were dedicated to that companies victims alone. Essentially their employees played the part of 'victims' of their company who were telling the true victims of their company that they had no way of fighting the company. There probably is a lot of public information out there about the company, but the worst of these companies have people who are dedicated to seeing if their name pops up online.
Re: Re: Re: CA refuses to speak to me gotchya, jam better to be safe than sorry see your point quite clear thx for the heads up !
