cc charge-off,not mine

You may have to say FRAUD

 

Is there a judgment or is it at a collection agency?
When did your mom stop paying this debt? How old were you when this account was opened?

Michelle

 

OK, it does put you in a spot. First check your state SOL. If that is no help, I would go back to the credit card company and tell them the truth. I know you don't want to get your mother in trouble but I personally don't see any other way. Someone else here may have other ideas. Good Luck.

Michelle

 

You may have a "slim" out here...requires some investigation though.

If you are listed as an "Authorized User", most times there is a separate account number, and you can request documentation on activity for that account.

You will have to look into whether your mother put you down as an "additional card" or as an "Authorized User" on HER card.

The CC company is stating that you "legally" owe them a debt by reporting on your reports....You can DEMAND VALIDATION from the CC company that YOU are LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE for the debt.

You will need to sit down with your mother and gather all the info you can, I imagine that this acct is in collections...Go through everything you have on this account, I'm sure between the Collection Agency (CA) and the CC company (OC=Original Creditor) they've made some mistakes. And you have them now because you can PROVE damages due to loan denial.

I would strongly recommend consulting an attorney on this one. You are walking a very fine line here, the same message from an attorney's office will have more legitamacy aroound it.

Good Luck, Let us know how it turns out....

 

1*The decision came back as judgement stay's
2*Any suggestion's on where to start as far as getting this off of my credit.
jcr
==============
1*What judgment ? I thought you said it was a charge offf."
Were you ever sued?
2*send this to the CA
Here is the Validation Letter you want to send by CRRR.
Don't make any changes on it and don't hand sign it.

Your Name
Address
City State Zip

Company
Address
City State Zip

Date

RE: Account #_________/Original Creditorâ??s Name

Dear Sir/Madame:

Thank you for your recent inquiry. This is not a refusal to pay, but a notice that your claim is being disputed. This is a request for validation made pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Please complete and return the attached disclosure request form.

Be advised that I am not requesting a "verification" that you have my mailing address, I am requesting a "validation;" that is, competent evidence that I have some contractual obligation to pay you.

You should also be aware that sending unsubstantiated demands for payment through the United States Mail System might constitute mail fraud under federal and state law. You may wish to consult with a competent legal advisor before your next communication with me.

Your failure to satisfy this request within the requirements of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act will be construed as your absolute waiver of any and all claims against me, and your tacit agreement to compensate me for costs and attorney fees.

Sincerely,


Your Name don't sign


- - - Include the following on a separate sheet of paper - - -


CREDITOR DISCLOSURE STATEMENT



Name and Address of Collector (assignee): _________________________

Name and Address of Debtor: ____________________________________

Account Number(s): ____________________________________________

What are the terms of assignment for this account? You may attach a facsimile of any records relating to such terms.

Have any insurance claims been made by any creditor or assignee regarding this account? YES/NO

Has the purported balanced of this account been used in any tax deduction claim? YES/NO

Please list the particular products or services sold by the collector to the debtor and the dollar amount of each:


Upon failure or refusal of collector to validate this collection action, collector agrees to waive all claims against the debtor named herein and pay debtor for all costs and attorney fees involved in defending this collection action.

________________________________
Authorized signature for Collector

Date_______/_______/_______

Please return this completed form and attach all assignment or other transfer agreements that would establish your right to collect this debt. Your claim cannot be considered if any portion of this form is not completed and returned with the required documents. This is a request for validation made pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. If you do not respond as required by this law, your claim will not be considered and you may be liable for damages for continued collection efforts.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Send this letter next if you don't get validation in 30 days.

Estoppel Letter
DON'T CHANGE
Send CRRR

Your Name
Address
«City», «State» «Zip»

Company»
Address
«City», «State» «Zip»

«Date»

RE: Dispute Letter of <insert date>

Dear Sir/Madame:

As I have not heard back from you in over 30 days regarding my notice of dispute dated <insert date>, and you have not supplied the demanded proof of the alleged debt, under the doctrine of estoppel by silence, Engelhardt v Gravens (Mo) 281 SW 715, 719, I may presume that no proof of the alleged debt, nor therefore any such debt, in fact exists.

In a good faith effort to resolve this matter amicably, I restate my demand for proof of the debt, specifically the alleged contract or other instrument bearing my signature, as well as proof of your authority in this matter. Absent such proof, you must terminate this collection action and correct any erroneous reports of this debt as mine.

For the record, I state again that as I have no account with you, nor am I your customer, nor have I entered into a contract with you, I must ask for the following information:


Please evidence your authorization under 15 USC 1692 (e) and 15 USC 1692 (f) in this alleged matter.

What is your authorization of law for your collection of information?

What is your authorization of law for your collection of this alleged debt?

Please evidence your authorization to do business or operate in the state of ____________________ .

Please evidence proof of the alleged debt, including specifically the alleged contract or other instrument bearing my signature.


You have fifteen (15) days from receipt of this notice to respond. Your failure to respond, on point, in writing, hand signed, and in a timely manner, will work as a waiver to any and all of your claims in this matter, and will entitle me to presume that you sent your letter(s) in error, and that this matter is permanently closed.

Your continued silence is unacceptable. Either provide the proof or correct the record to remove the invalid debt from my credit files with the three primary credit-reporting agencies. You are currently in violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act and the Fair Debt Collection Act.

Failure to respond within 15 days of receipt of this registered letter will result in a small claims action against your company. I will be seeking $____________ in damages for the following:


Defamation

Negligent Enablement of Identity Fraud

Violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act

After obtaining the judgment against your company, I will obtain a Writ of Execution from the Sheriffâ??s office in your county and I will begin the process of attaching property or funds to satisfy the judgment.

For the purposes of 15 USC 1692 et seq., this Notice has the same effect as a dispute to the validity of the alleged debt and a dispute to the validity of your claims. This Notice is an attempt to correct your records, and any information received from you will be collected as evidence should any further action be necessary. This is a request for information only, and is not a statement, election, or waiver of status.

I affirm under penalty of perjury under the Laws of the Land for the United States of America, that the foregoing is true and correct, to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Sincerely,
Your Name DON'T SIGN

 

Jc,

You're on the right track, follow up and diligence are the next key ingredients.

1) Send a "Debt Validation" letter (plenty of samples on this board) to credit card company

2) Send same letter to Collection Agencies (both) (Certified Mail-Return Receipt Requested)

3) Whoever you clear this up with (i.e. CA, CC Co.) GET something IN WRITING to that point, and file away.

4) Check ALL your credit reports for inclusion of this acct., then DISPUTE as "NOT MINE"

5) Write the credit bureaus that you request copies of your amended reports sent to your credit union where you took out the loan


Next...Your Mom!

1) Send out "Debt Validation" letters to the Collection Agencies

2) Try to negotiate a settlement/payment plan with the original CC company (avoid CA)

3) Try to negoatiate removal of any negative info reported on your Mom's reports (Try anyway!)

4) Get WRITTEN AGREEMENT OF PAYMENT PLAN BEFORE paying any money to CC Company!

GOOD LUCK! But I think you have this one pretty well beat!!

 

Huh? Not even close, actually.


Unless JCR initiates legal action against his Mom for fraud, the debt belongs to BOTH of them. You can't claim "fraud" and get out of a debt without the company being able to take legal and/or civil action against the person who comitted the fraud. It just doesn't work that way. Years and years ago, a relative stole several checks and some blank checks from me, then forged my name and cashed the checks.

As much as I didn't want to, the only way to get the THOUSANDS of dollars back was to file the appropriate fraud forms with the lender, who then took it up with the police.

Back to our situation: A payment was last made by JCR's Mom in 2001 - the SOL is not even close to expiring yet.

Whether or not his Mom "wrote a letter asking for him to be removed from the account" or not, the fact remains that, if they did not send a form for BOTH of them to sign off on, then he's still one of the two joint applicants that "owns" the account and "owns" the debt. A "letter" that got no response could have been typed up yesterday -- and it does NOT remove the legal obligation of a joint account holder/borrower.

Sure, JCR can write dispute letters (e.g., "NOT MINE") to the CRA. And he can tell the CA to send proof of the debt's validity or quit bothering him/his Mom.

Either (a) he'll get EXTREMELY LUCKY and they'll just "magically" remove the trade lines and forget about the debt that is, from what I can tell, still legally enforceable and for which the OC can still file suit to obtain a judgement over or (b) the trade line will remain, as it is a legal and valid debt that is still within the FCRA rules for being reported to the CRA's.

The SOL doesn't start from 1996 (when the account opened) -- it starts from 2001 (in this case).

I'm not following your line of thinking here, Bizwiz41.

What, exactly, makes this one "pretty well beat"?

You make it sound as if JCR can just "clear this up" by writing a letter and assuming that the CC company will simply remove his liability from this bad debt. Again, without legal action being initiated against the person who committed the fraud, the CC just "ain't gonna do that" -- otherwise, the CC would have to have a policy to let every joint account that went into delinquency have one of the two co-borrowers released from liability when it went bad.

They just don't do that.

When they have a delinquent account and they have TWO people legally resposible for it, why would they willingly let one person "off the hook"? That reduces their chances of getting their money back. Every one income family would open up joint accounts, let it go delinquent, and then "write a letter" to the lender stating that the non-working co-borrower is to be the only person liable for the bad debt. Duh!

I'm not trying to give JCR a hard time. I'm just trying to be realistic here.

Again, all this would be different *IF* he filed a claim of fraud against his Mom, which is a difficult decision -- do you value your credit or your mother?

 

Re: Re: cc charge-off,not mine

A case of fraud means the person INTENDED to defraud. Putting her daughter down as co-applicant does NOT prove intent of fraud. Her letter for request of removal(though it could be contested, yes) does show intent to remove. The CC company did have to respond to this letter (even if they didn't). They could be construes as "negligent" if not responding to request.

As for TWO people responsible, that would have to be "proven" or "validated". The true question is: Did JCR's Mom SIGN her name on application, or just put her down as "Authorized User". It will all come down to signature card on application.

Again, the bottom line here is the following:

1) CC company/CA wants their money...period.

2) JCR needs her credit report corrected/repaired.

In all this matter, though there is no discussion, I am sure JCR and Mom want to address this mess, and that includes payment/settlement.

JCR can "negoatiate" removal through forcing "proof" of liability w/CA & CC Co.

Above can be done in concert w/payment arrangements, perhaps best done w/CC Co.

 

Re: Re: cc charge-off,not mine

JCR:

Have you called/written CC Co. to "request status" of YOUR account?

It would be interesting to see if YOU show up on CURRENT account information.

What is interesting here is that it appears CC Co. NEVER contacted you seeking payment on this account. I am sure they would have contacted you at some point if you had LEGAL responsibility for debt.

Let us know what you find out.........

 

Re: Re: Re: cc charge-off,not mine

What have you been smoking?

His mom KNEW her credit (by itself) was NOT good enough to obtain credit from this credit card company. His mom, without knowledge of JCR, put his name, DOB and SS# on the application -- AND she would have HAD to of forged his signature.

Do you even know what fraud is? Fraud is defined as a deception deliberately practiced to secure unfair or unlawful gain

She LIED on the application, used someone else's information to GAIN approval for a line of credit that she otherwise would NOT have obtained. THAT IS FRAUD, plain and simple.

Again, the letter COULD HAVE BEEN TYPED UP YESTERDAY. They have no return receipt or other proof of delivery that the letter was ever sent. Without that, you have NO proof that the letter was ever sent. And even if it WAS sent, the CC company isn't "negligent" because they didn't remove someone from a joint credit card account !! If that was the case, then all a person (who has BAD credit) would have to do is (a) apply for a card with someone with GOOD credit, (b) when the account is approved and the card issued, they then just "write a letter" requesting that the "good credit person" be removed. And (according to your claim) if they don't remove the "good credit person, the CC is negligent??? C'mon, use your head! In MOST cases (if not all), if you want someone removed from a CC that is a joint account, the person who is going to keep the account must be APPROVED by the bank -- in a much similar manner as applying for a whole new account. The forms they send have both people sign them - AUTHORIZING the bank to TRY to remove one of the parties -- but if the person who wants to KEEP the account IS NOT APPROVED (i.e., too low FICO score, too much other debt, no income, etc.), then the bank does NOT have to remove the other person from liability.

You're gonna need a lot more than a letter and a verbal claim that it was mailed to find a bank 'negligent' -- pah-leeze.

It is VALIDATED by the fact that JCR chooses NOT to follow through with criminal charges against his Mom.

Plain and simple, if he wants to remove responsibility from HIMSELF, he's GOT to turn his Mom in.

YOU CAN NOT CLAIM FRAUD and be discharged of your responsibility of the debt without following through with the appropriate actions with the proper authorities, whether it was your Mom or if you are a victim of identity theft.

No.

Sure, JCR can "try" anything he wants. But the only way to PROVE liability (in this case) is NOT his is to file charges against his Mom. It's no different than an identity theft case, other than you KNOW who the other person is already.

Some related reading:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/11/26/national/main530840.shtml

Honestly, you may wish to bone up on this subject. Not only have I don't plenty of research, but I was a victim of a similar situation.

 

BTW: Fraud is also defined as intentional misrepresentation of truth for the purpose of obtaining something of value by inducing another to rely upon false information.

Mom misrepresented to gain credit by lying to the credit card company. This is fraud.

 

Mr. Schimmer:

I am enjoying this "debate", and I hope we are both benefiting JCR.

However, I too have "experience" in these matters, having been a "victim" myself, as you have.

It must be noted that in JCR's original post, the CC was applied for BEFORE financial difficulties. So, the point gets questionable as to her intent to "gain something of value". Hence her "intent" cannot be "proven" as criminal.

Also, you are entirely correct re: reprocessing account after removal request, and this is where the CC Co. approached "negligence".

Another question is: "Where is JCR's card for this account? If JCR is "legally on this account, where is the card, and statements. JCR's Mom's statements should show the card somewhere, or at least JCR's name on the statement.

Refusal to file charges of fraud is NOT validation...
Can this be used as evidentiary documentation? IF "evidence" of legal responsibility is "provided", THEN claiming fraud IS the next step, in a "traditional" case.

Obviously, as JCR described the CA's actions, they're trying more scare tactics than substantial moves. JCR has several violations detailed in the description, whether knowingly or not, JCR handled the situation well.

Again, I am enjoying this spirited exchange, and hope JCR is gainging someting useful. However, we need to keep our eye upon the "doughnut" of "realistically" rectifying this situation for JCR.

AND....BTW: THE BRUINS WILL BE BACK!

 

Re: Re: cc charge-off,not mine

I'm sure he his. My intention is NOT to make him fail to follow up on this, but to instill a dose of reality in him.

That point is irrelevant. Your suggesting that one must be in dire financial straights before one can be charged with fraud [concerning fraudulently obtained credit using fraudlently completed applications for credit extension]. I'd be really interested in what statute you can point me to that says I must FIRST be in financial ruins before I can be criminally charged with fraud. If that's the case, why doesn't everybody with GOOD credit fill out an application for a card with YOU as the joint applicant, and then not worry about the legal issues because they "can't be charged with fraud" ?

Sorry, but I didn't follow you on that one.

Again, completely irrelevant. What does it matter? Show me the judge and/or the DA who's gonna give you an ounce of compasion because JCR "claims" that he never saw a card or statement. The ONLY way that you'll get the judge or DA to agree is if you do WHAT I ALREADY SAID: if he turns his Mom in and she's charged criminally. You keep making statements starting with "legally", then you turn around and try to say that he doesn't have to turn his Mom in. That's the whole point of saying "Is he LEGALLY on this account" -- if he's not, then it's because his Mom committed FRAUD, which is a criminal offense.

And who's to say that JCR isn't LYING about never having a card or getting a statement? How is the judge or DA supposed to KNOW that this is the truth and not just some lie that he's making up to get out from under the debt? How does the judge know whether that "letter" was written yesterday, or that it ever WAS mailed at all??

Yes, it is. Not in a direct sense, but the ONLY way to for JCR to be NOT LIABLE for the account is if he can PROVE that he never applied for it, he never knew about it and he never used it. THE ONLY WAY TO ACCOMPLISH THIS IS TO PROVE THAT SOMEONE ELSE FRAUDULENTLY OBTAINED CREDIT WITHOUT HIS CONSENT. If this is proven, the bank WILL require that he fulfill his obligation to prosecute the offender (even if it IS his Mom). Otherwise, they WILL NOT dissolve HIS liability in this issue.

What is so hard to understand about this? This is simply a LEGAL issue. JCR proves he was a 'victim', or JCR is liable. The only way for JCR to prove he was a 'victim' is to name SOMEONE, even if that person is "unknown" (e.g., a typical identity theft case where you don't know the criminal), COMMITTED A CRIME. In this case, it was, by his own NON-ADMISSION, it was his MOM.

Either he turns her in or he remains liable for the debt. Done deal.

I never said that the CA was innocent in any or all of this. I've only (meant) to address the legal issues regarding JCR's obligation -- or not -- to repay the debt.

And no matter how many times you say "... well, maybe he is/was only an AU on this account ..." -- JCR has already indicated that it is a joint account, not an AU thing. Therefore, there's no sense in bring up the AU 'possibility' again.

"As you wander through this life, no matter what your goal, keep your eye upon the doughnut, and NOT upon the hole." -- My Step-Dad, circa 1981.

That's EXACTLY what I'm trying to do -- keep the REALITY in this.

Does the possibility exist that he will be totally exhonerated for this, completely released of liability, have his credit histories cleared of it *AND* have his Mom NOT legally prosecuted for her fraudulent actions WITHOUT JCR having to assist the bank in prosecuting his Mom? Sure, anything is possible. But do I HONESTLY think it's gonna happen? No way.

Been hearing that since Phil Esposito, Bobby Orr, Gerry Cheevers, Wayne Cashman and John Buyck were on the ice ...

 

charge-off,not mine

Send a "Debt Validation" letter (plenty of samples on
bizwiz41
==================
The letters he needs are right above in my other post.

THE END ** *** ** LB 59
""""```--~~~~~~~~~--```'""'''