charge off not mine- still showing

Discussion in 'Credit Talk' started by christy461, Jan 11, 2005.

  1. christy461

    christy461 Active Member

    Sears has once again reported a charge off under my name that is not mine.It was my ex husband's business account (sole proprietor). I was an authorized user. I have a letter from Sears stating," We have removed your name from the above account as of March 14, 2001,and will no longer send this information to the credit bureaus in your name".

    It still shows up- this time on Experian.Every time I pull my credit report, there it is somewhere. The amount is app. $3000.

    How can I get them to stop forever? I am sick and tired of sending their own letter back to them and waiting for 3 months while they correct it, only to see it show up on the next cycle.
     
  2. jam237

    jam237 Well-Known Member

    Have you sent the letter to Experian?

    Send the letter to Experian, with a "not mine" dispute.

    Meanwhile, go over Johnson v. MBNA, and write a letter quoting it to Sears, and provide it with the copy of their own letter.

    Essentially you are telling them, that if you verify this account with the CRA's, I will sue you, and consumers have won a $90,300.00 verdict in similar cases.

    If the tradeline is removed in a CRA dispute, they can't just 're-submit' it next cycle, they have to MANUALLY submit it with a statement that the dispute which it was removed because of has been resolved; and the CRA has to provide you with a notice when it has been re-submitted.
     
  3. christy461

    christy461 Active Member

    Thank you! Hope at last!
     
  4. ontrack

    ontrack Well-Known Member

    How many times have you found it, told them to remove it, had it removed, and had it come back?
     
  5. christy461

    christy461 Active Member

    At least 4.
     
  6. Flyingifr

    Flyingifr Well-Known Member

    You file suit against Sears for FCRA violation and Breach of Contract (yes, Breach of Contract).

    Here's the contract:

    1. You disputed your liability over this account before and threatened to sue them unless they removed it from your CRA and kept it off (the Offer).
    2. They agreed, and sent you a letter detailing that agreement (the acceptance).
    3. You gave up your right to sue them (the passage of something of value)

    Now that they have violated and broken that contract, and you have the letter wherein they admit it should not be in your CRA file, and a copy of your CRA file showing a Sears trade line, they are dead meat.
     
  7. christy461

    christy461 Active Member

    Any form letters to help me start? I am really new at this! I cleaned up my credit by (stupidly) paying EVERYTHING off, including a ton of charge offs from my ex, as a condition on financing my house 3 years ago. Now that I found this site, I'd like to get everything off, since most of those stupid debts weren't mine to begin with.
     
  8. christy461

    christy461 Active Member

    Re: charge off not mine- still show

    Found them! Should I use a letter to give one last chance or...

    Or should I just file suit?
     
  9. ontrack

    ontrack Well-Known Member

    Re: charge off not mine- still show

    Also file a complaint with both BBB and your state's AG. Outline the history of their reporting, repeatedly in error, removed after admitting it is in error, then repeatedly reinserting. It indicates they don't have adequate systems in place to ensure accurate reporting, or to permanently correct errors when found.
     
  10. ontrack

    ontrack Well-Known Member

    Re: charge off not mine- still show

    One reason to not leave out regulatory complaints, both to your state AG and to FTC, in a case like this, is that Sears has an existing track record of regulatory violations in many states, involving collections of charged off accounts not legally collectable, such as accounts included in bankruptcy. As part of their settlements involving this, there may have been agreements to comply with state and federal law, and to put in place systems to monitor that compliance. Being in violation of those agreements could put them in much more pain than minor problems from one consumer.
     
  11. ontrack

    ontrack Well-Known Member

Share This Page