calvary portfolio

Discussion in 'Credit Talk' started by dec, May 13, 2007.

  1. dec

    dec Active Member

    I saw an inquiry from calavry on my credit report so i sent them a dv. That was on 4/12. now i see thwey added their tl to mr cr and said it was disputed . what should i do? and by the way its been almost 30 days and they havent validated.
     
  2. collectman

    collectman Well-Known Member

    When did they add the account to the CR? What day did they receive your DV? They are not required to respond to your DV within 30 days, they must only cease collections, and report disputed if it has been reported.
     
  3. ontrack

    ontrack Well-Known Member

    You may mean Cavalry Portfolio. BBB searches on Calvary bring up Cavalry.

    Have they sent you an FDCPA letter notifying you of your rights to dispute and request validation? (Yes, you already DV'd them, but your letter to them was their "first contact", if they otherwise fail to contact you themselves, and your letter to THEM does not meet their legal obligations to notify YOU. Of course, they will probably just claim they sent you "lots" of letters, years ago, but their inquiry, and TL, JUST showed up NOW!)

    If you can show, via sending your DV CRRR, and getting back the green card, that they have received your DV, and have had it for a couple weeks to overcome claims that things crossed in the mail, have you disputed the TL thru the CRA(s) reporting it?

    Following a timely validation request, with no validation yet sent in reply, just as posting the TL is "continued collection", so is "verifying" a TL already there even if they argue (honestly or not) that they put it there before receiving your DV.

    Ceasing collection includes not "verifying" disputed TLs that they have not validated. In addition, if they verified an erroneous TL, after receiving your DV, you might then add FCRA violations for wilfully posting the erroneous TL that they knew from your validation request might be erroneous. Start looking for damages, such as being turned down for credit, higher rates or lower limits on existing accounts, etc.

    How many chances should they get?
     
  4. ontrack

    ontrack Well-Known Member

    By the way, Cavalry appears to be doing a steady business with BBB, and gets a mention in this document for re-aging a 30 year old alleged debt and failing to reinvestigate to correct:
    http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/FACTA-furnishers/522110-00067.pdf

    Here are some consumer reports of their tactics. Note that in one case, they are apparently collecting from the wrong person, who never had the alleged account, and in the other, on a debt discharged in bankruptcy. Doesn't seem to make any difference to them.
    http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/ripoff138753.htm
    http://ripoffreport.com/reports/ripoff114462.htm

    Note that in the first case, they pulled the "read the deadbeat his credit report" play, to show how much power they have, and "prove" he is the one that owes it. Consumer disputed and wanted validation, since it wasn't his account. Response was threats to sue, the implication he had no right to validation, and that any attempt to request it would result in suit. Account may be past SOL anyway, even in Maryland, and their immediate goal may be to reset SOL by a minimum payment or repayment agreement, so to hell with FDCPA as long as it's on the phone and no-one can prove it. And once you get that payment, the whole nasty issue of threatening to sue on a time-barred debt just goes away. How were you supposed to know, but it's now moot, so pay up cause we CAN sue you now.

    No doubt, you can get a clearer picture from direclty searching ripoffreport.com. Their search function tends to jam up during the day.
     
  5. ontrack

    ontrack Well-Known Member

    Any information from the TL on the alleged debt?
     
  6. ontrack

    ontrack Well-Known Member

    Here is another complaint against them. Again, consumer claims they never had such an account, and another consumer replying claims the same, and that in addition they re-aged the erroneous TL in response to their dispute.

    Note that the response to a request for validation was a reply requesting further information, with no validation sent. Also note that TX AG indicated they had received 32 complaints on them in 1 month.

    http://ripoffreport.com/reports/ripoff209052.htm
     

Share This Page