cc charge-off,not mine

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

Huh? Biz, you should get your facts straight before posting.

Neither 'joint' nor 'co-signer' indicate an "AU" report. Two are 'joint' and one is 'co-signer', both of which indicate a shared financial responsibility for the account. Co-signer typically indicates that somoene else is primary and this person is secondary. However, both are equally and legally responsible.

If it was an 'AU' listing, it would state "AUTHORIZED USER". I doesn't matter, though, because creditors routinely report joint accounts as individual, individual as joint, AU as joint, etc., .etc.

If JCR *DID* have a report that said "AU", that *could* work in his benefit, but it's not a lock. If he goes that route, then they somehow come up with an application with him as co-applicant (co-signer), then the credit report showing 'AU' means nothing.

Regardless -- JCR, wait for the validation. If they have no application, no receipts or activity with "your" card/card number, no statements sent to you or your address, no checks written from YOU to make payments, you could be close to clearing this up.

 

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

See my last post, JCR.

As far as financial and legal responsibility, there is no difference whatsoever between a "Joint" account holder and a "Co-Signer".

Typically, the term "joint account" refers to an unsecured revolving account, such as a credit card, where the balance and payment amounts change on a monthly basis and there no direct security in the item(s) purchased.

A 'Co-signer' refers to someone who "guarantees" the loan, usually an auto loan or something that is secured with the property that's being financed, of another person by "co-signing" the loan document -- essentially, agreeing to be liable for any/all of the debt in the event that the primary borrower fails to fulfill his/her obligation.

From a legal and financial standpoint, there is no difference between the primary borrower and the co-signer. If the primary borrower, or applicant, fails to make the payments on time, they can and will go after the co-signer for the debt.

A 'car' is a 'vehicle', and it's also an 'automobile'. Different names, same implication. Like I said, most refer to a "joint account" as a revolving, unsecured account, while a "co-signer" is typically involved in a secured, simple interest type loan.

 

Sassy, a troll, yea right. Definitely not a fool, probably one of the most intelligent, well respected, and very well read people on this board. A category I don't place you in.

You are one of the reasons I am really getting disgusted with Creditnet.

Do you really need to call people names to make your point?

 

I've been on this board giving excellent, sound advice for three times as long as you, and over twice as long as Sassy. Feel free to read through all the archives from the years and years before you ever showed up. I've received many kudos, thank yous and such over the years. I even created the original "Who Pulls Which CRA" website (formerly located at www.millcbs.com) years ago, which the concept of was taken over after my departure by PshchDoc and turned into a similar resource here on CreditNet.

You consider Sassy 'one of the most intelligent' ?? Consider this statement made by Sassy:

They [the definitions of fraud] still don't have a thing to do with the definition of identity theft nor the laws relative to identity theft nor what constitutes a contractual obligation nor whether or not he is liable.

Do you agree with Sassy, your 'most intelligent friend', that FRAUD has NOTHING TO DO with identity theft nor the laws relative to it?

I await your response to that question.

I was here LONG before you, and will be here LONG after.

If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then more than likely, it is a duck. Or in this case, a fool. Someone who shows up in the middle of a thread and begins dispensing and armload of false statements is, in my books, a fool that should NOT be listed to.

I'm sure that Sassy has probably given some good advice over the months that he/she has been posting. However, this time is NOT one of those.

 

Never-the-less Shimmer, you may wish to be a little more careful about whom you label a Troll or Fool.

Although Sassy does make [very] occasional mistakes in interpretation (as do we all) it does happen RARELY.

Dig out your copy of "How to win friends and influence people" for a quick refresher.

 

Re: Re: cc charge-off,not mine

I don't give a rat's patooty if you FOUNDED this board. You were still RUDE.

Yeah, and you make 6 figures, you own a big boat, a house worth 200+K have lots of metal-related cards, etc. ad nauseum. Do you ever get tired of pounding your own chest?

Schemes to commit identity theft or fraud may also involve violations of other statutes such as identification fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1028), credit card fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1029), computer fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1030), mail fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1341), wire fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1343), or financial institution fraud (18 U.S.C. § 1344).

Just from reading those comments from the DOJ site, it seems that my very intelligent friend does have a basis for her comments. Whether in the end they are right or wrong is again, not the issue I have. It was your name-calling. I can certainly say I have never seen her resort to absolute rudeness to win or lose a point.

Therefore, you get to call someone names?

Well, at least I know what your quack sounds like.

 

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

I was rude for calling a fool a fool? Bee ohh ohh, ach ohh ohh. You obviously have skin thinner than that of a peach.

And your point is .... ???

Keep your nose clean, fix your credit and, one day, you too might have nice things. BTW: The house is closer to $300K than $200K, but I have the knowledge, ability, experience, education and know-how to hold down the career that pays the mortgage to have that home and the loan on that boat, so what's it to you?

I give good advice. Part of giving good advice is to make sure that those who give BAD advice are identified as such. If you feel the desire to run around and boo-hoo-hoo because I called someone a fool for giving INCORRECT information to a Creditnet rookie who's looking for real, accurate and informative advice, then feel free to knock yourself out doing it.

JCR is on the right path. Whether or not you're whining is of little importance to what I am trying to do -- help JCR.

What is the primary subject/noun in the first sentence, Oh Mighty Sulking One? SCHEMES. Not THEFT, but SCHEMES. And it says "SCHEMES" MAY INCLUDE -- it does not say that IDENTITY THEFT MAY INCLUDE".

ID THEFT (as opposed to SCHEMES TO COMMIT IDENTITY THEFT -- which is what was originally being discussed -- HAS to include one of them. As I originally stated, you can't have an identity THEFT without something being DONE with it (e.g., credit card fraud, mail fraud, wire fraud, etc.).

When you quote something, make sure you understand what it SAYS and what it MEANS. Your 'cut and paste' tactics may fool others here, but not those of us who can actually READ and COMPREHEND.

I called a fool a fool, for POSTING INACCURATE INFORMATION.

Don't be a fool -- don't post inaccurate information.

Ooooooh. Now wasn't THAT an "IN-TELLU-JUNT" statement?

Get your facts straight, then make your comments.

 

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

John,

Whatever respect you earned from me in the years we've been on this board has just been obliterated.

You're out of line. And you are dumber than you think yourself to be if after all the years of posting on this board, you can't figure out who to call a "troll" and a "fool".

____


Ironically, just a few weeks ago another poster defended her rude interaction in the name of giving correct advice (and ironically, it was to you). She ended up getting banned. Do you intend on following in her footsteps?

 

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

The many replies above made the point that "co-signer" is NOT the same as "Authorized User". Sorry, JCR, thought we had something here.

To Mr. Schimmer: yes a listing as "AU" would have been a "crack", and a "crack" is not a lock". Once again, the purpose of these threads as been to TRY and HELP a member.

So, JCR, stick to the process...which you've done so far. Before we get into "Fraud", let's first VALIDATE the debt, and your legal responsibility.

NEXT, Please help us help YOU, to save time, and eliminate confusion, could you please post the credit report entries for this account EXACTLY as their posted on your reports. There is a tremendous amount of good advice on this board, but GOOD INFORMATION is needed for GOOD ADVICE.

Your NEXT action step will be to DISPUTE the CREDIT REPORTS. That should be coming up soon, as soon as you get the "green card" back. Please post the CR info, and WE will help you with the dispute process if you need it.

Then, we need to look at your Mom's situation. I don't think we need to get into a "fraud issue" here. There are many options that can help you both.

i.e....if you negotiate with the CC Co. or CA, perhaps they will remove the CR entries for payment. If the CC Co. pushes for fraud, they know they will not get their money. That is ALL they want.

You're doing all the right actions right now JCR. Hang In There.

P.S. Take care of your Mom too, she's still your Mom! She made an 'HONEST" mistake, forgive her, I'm sure she's forgiven you somewhere over the years!

 

JCR,

First off, I will apologize to you for my part in hijacking your thread.

Secondly, Bizwiz is giving you excellent advice. Follow the process and see what road it leads to. Hopefully this will get all that stuff off your credit reports.

You will still at some point (IMHO) have to address the debt. We all know here that just because its not on our reports doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Everyone of us here, hear you and your Mom. She did not do anything in an attempt to hurt you. She thought she was helping! How many of our parents have done the same?

$3700 is a lot of money, but probably less than a good attorney would charge to get you thru this mess. I hope for the best for you and your Mom and that you can get thru this.

One last question, which I don't recall seeing. What state are you in? It might be interesting to know how much longer they have to "come after you"

jlynn

 

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

I'll second that. Take it from a guy who's Mom has already passed, you'll be glad you did.

 

I second Butch. It took a long time before I thought about calling my mother all the time only to realize that I couldn't do that anymore.

 

Re: Re: cc charge-off,not mine

 

Re: Re: cc charge-off,not mine

SOL is 4 years in Utah. Your mother lives in Utah as well?