Remember this when dealing with a CA: Q: How can you tell when a CA is lying? A: Their lips move. Serious...
Nodding, Validate first! LizardKing just posted this a few days ago, IF they validate and you still want to offer a pay for deletion, and that's a big if, from: http://consumers.creditnet.com/straighttalk/board/showthread.php?s=&postid=243731#post243731 Sassy Here is how you word the settlement letter with the collection agency. Send something like this to them and tell them as soon as they sign and return it you will pay them a check for 30% of the disputed debt. The alleged debtor (your name) does not admit liability for the claims made by (collection agency/original creditor). The purpose of this settlement is merely to avoid the potential future costs of litigation. Both parties agree that this settlement for 30% of the disputed debt shall be confidential and in no way an admission of liability or acknowledgment that the debt is valid. Both parties agree that no future reporting or verification of the alledged debt shall be provided to any credit bureau. ________________________ Your sig ________________________ Collection Agnecy Authorized Sig
this appears to be a CA collecting for another CA. not sure what I can do about that. I have no idea who the original doctor was on this. they claim that a 'female' spoke to them last year when they called my home and said I was just laid off from work and would try to make a payment. that is wrong, I never was laid off and my wife would never even talk to a CA. bah, cant believe Im going to have to go through a long drawn out battle over a sub 200 dollar medical collection.
That's why you should request validation, imlost! You're entitled to know before paying, and have proof. Sometimes it read likes validation is a rabbit in the big black hat, it's not a trick, you are entitled to the information, they are required to provide it. Sassy
I can't believe it either. Why would you want to go through all this for such a small problem that could easily be disposed of. Though those proponents of validation are technically correct I'm assuming you have other things to do with your time. Recently I went to a CA and handed them a $100 MO for a debt my wife didn't owe. It was well worth it. The problem is GONE and everybody is happy. Take the emotional component out of the equation and reduce this decision to a straight business decision. Otherwise you'll be arguing this account in January. I'm just trying to help you clean up your report. The decision is yours and only you can make it. Naturally we'll be behind ya either way.
ok fave butch growling dude: If I ever am unfortunate enough to have another medical collection causing me grief, and they won't validate, the reason why better not be because Mr. Butch paid for the foxy Mrs. Butch's bill that she didn't owe because we were such a pain in his butt. LOL Sassy
thanks. what do you guys think about accord and satisfaction/restrictive endorsement? since they wont sign anything.. I can send a letter with payment that says 'by cashing this you agree to remove this from my credit profiles' blah blah.. and i will also print it on the money order. In texas they cannot do the write 'do not agree' or whatever on it..they just have 90 days to refund my money if they dont agree. Just throwing that out there...
what are the pitfalls? Im probably going to validate anyway, just curious in case I wish to do this in the future.
My biggest bloodiest battle was a 48 dollar medical collection... This was with the (ca) woman who promised deletion if I paid... The hospital reported this account as a collection account in complete error.. I had a thread from way back about this..I just can't find it..
Hmmm OK.. some of the pitfalls... sending a personal check could be a huge pitfall... They can decide not to cash the check you sent and use that info somehow to take money from your checking account... Uhmmmmm ok.. there is more..I am still trying to find specific things about restricted checks...
When sending the agreement letter for them to sign, should you sign before you send it or wait until it is sent back to sign. Was that a confusing sentence? I know I am confused.
Kaz...yeah very confusing... LOL I thing waiting to sign is probably the safer deal. I guess I am paranoid but the last thing you want is a CA to have a copy of any document with your signature.
imlost. here is a link about the restrictive check deal http://www.carreonandassociates.com/restrictiveoffer.htm I know I read somewhere about common mistakes but couldn't find it..
That is why you check your state laws on "accord and satisfaction". You write on the back of the check that cashing this check consitutes payment in full and lineitem deletion from all CRAs. They want to cash the check???? Of course. Then you have their "agreement" to your terms..... IN WRITING!
Update, called them. (yes I was careful, but I was getting ignored) they claim they will send accord and satisfaction checks right back. Therefore that tells me they are lying to me. So, the validation process will begin. Im about to mail it out now. They would not give me any info on the original creditor (whom is not listed in the phone book apparently, and I have no idea what this debt is for) but she did say speaking to them would make no difference. (of course she would say that) The only problem with this is, the account is actually a little over 1 year old from what I can tell. Would that be a problem? (i originally thought it was older)
