It worked!! I haven't picked up the hang of quoting from a previous thread yet, but the letter you posted last weekend for removal of paid collections (we call it the "litigious nutcase letter" in our house) has already gotten a removal of two paid collection accounts. And I didn't even mail them until Tuesday! Thank you again for posting it. The letter and your very clear post on how to use it and the rationale behind why it might work were very much appreciated. nquisitive
I really wished I knew which letter you were talking about. Can you find the letter and copy the URL for us all to see?
Re: Doc - "Litigious nutcase letter Hey, congratulations -- glad it worked for you too! Killer, I know you're wondering what in the world we're referencing, LOL. It's a letter I've used for FULLY PAID closed accounts with VERY LATE tradelines: http://consumers.creditnet.com/straighttalk/board/showthread.php?s=&postid=125081#post125081 Question for nquisitive: did you have it notarized and then sent via certified mail with return-receipt requested? I'm in favor of notarized signatures, but not everyone is, so I was wondering how you handled it in this case. Litigiously and nuttily, Doc
Re: Doc - "Litigious nutcase letter Would the LN Letter maybe work in a circumstance where something is reporting incorrectly and the company blames Equifax for not reporting it correctly and Equifax blames the company? Quite honestly, I don't care if Equifax corrects it or if the company sends EQ the correct info but I want it fixed and NOW!!!!! The 30 days started yesterday. (I am giving them a little benefit of the doubt since I actually sent it 12/27/01 via fax but it never got to the right person. ) Thanks for posting the link. I may try the Goodwill letter with one of my husband's accounts.
Doc - what about this? I have a paid collection with the phone company being reported by the CA only. Since I paid the bill and received new service from the phone company. I think they can easily validate. What do you think. I don't know to handle this one.
Re: Doc - "Litigious nutcase letter Hi Doc, I think having the signature notarized was part of the beauty of it. As a matter of fact, I hadn't put an attestation statement on the bottom of it, thinking the notary would have a stamp for it. Surprisingly, all she did was sign it, write the state on it and mark it with her seal. (I figured if it came with a lawyer's help, it would look a little more "buttoned up" than having just the notary's scrawling at the bottom.) So, I looked through some old estate papers, found a nice looking notary's attestation statement and added it to the end. Had her notarize the second one and away it went. Yes, we did send it CRRR. I haven't even gotten the green card back yet! I am still simply amazed at how fast it worked, but it makes perfect sense that the CAs don't want to spend a lot of time and effort on something from which they stand to gain nothing. Thanks again, this was a real hoot! nquisitive
Re: Doc - "Litigious nutcase letter Permission to steal? I can't believe that my Sallie Mae paid off loans are not only showing owed with the NLDS but are also showing past due during a period of time when I was in school and in deferment. I think I'll send a nutcase letter not only requiring NLDS correction but also CRA correction. OR I will sue. why not. I'm suing everybody anyway because of the car lawsuit... and my lawyer is FCRA savvy and aggressive for plaintiff-paid fees.
Re: Doc - "Litigious nutcase letter Marie I need a an agressive lawyer like yours. Is possible I could get his/her phone number?
Re: Doc - "Litigious nutcase letter Remember that with a paid account you don't need to worry about any number of things that otherwise might concern you if the debt was still outstanding. For example, you don't worry about whether you'll restart the statute of limitations, or whether they'll sue you or get a judgment, or whether they'll sell the debt to yet another collector. Since you've paid the debt, you're free of their threats! It is sometimes suggested that you lose your leverage if you pay your debt; well, if that's true (and I don't think it is) then if you pay your debt, THEY lose THEIR leverage too, lol. In this case, you have the leverage of suggesting that they are illegally reporting a tradeline. It seems to me that you have nothing to lose by giving the letter a try. I like that one too. Doc
Re: Doc - what about this? Well, Killer, as I said in the other thread, I used the nutcase letter with a fully-paid ORIGINAL creditor who can obviously verify the debt with ease. In this particular case, I had an extensive track record of late payments over a 2 year period. Although they certainly COULD have verified, my guess is that they were concerned regarding some of the many possibilities raised in my correspondence with them. They simply disposed of the matter by deleting their tradeline without ever writing me back. Keep me posted. Doc
Re: Doc - what about this? Doc, I read this post and the other with LN letter more than once in the past. It just dawned on me now that I can use it. How slow am I? (rhetorical, no answer necessary I've got 1 pd chgoff that refuses to go away and to pay me back for dispute spam, they re-aged it. Let's see what they think about the LN letter Thanks much!
Re: Doc - what about this? I don't know what I've been waiting for. I am a litigious nutcase. Cingular Wireless is going down!
Re: Doc - what about this? Doc or Anybody I have two settled in fulls with documentation from the collection agency both accounts are listed by Capital One as Settled In Full. Do you think there is a risk of them coming after me again if I were to send this type of letter?
Re: Doc - what about this? How could they come after you again for an account paid in full. I mean afterall, you the proof right on your always accurate credit report, right? go ahead and send the letter. Nothing bad will happen.
Re: Doc - what about this? I agree. The worst that could happen is you'd be labeled a "litigious nutcase". Doc are you offering a special CreditNet rate on your couch?
Re: Doc - "Litigious nutcase letter Hi everyone. My partner has a few boo-boos on his credit report from a few years ago. He paid OCs off in full but the negative tradelines are still on the credit report (of course). I have been reading this forum for a few weeks now and I really appreciate the insight and suggestions. I am going to print the Nutcase letter so my partner can remove the boo-boos once and for all. It seems that the letter has worked for people with paid-off accounts at OCs. Why not go after the three CRAs instead of the OCs? Are there any reasons why some people on this forum suggest going to the OCs (and CAs when applicable)? Last question: What could go wrong with sending this letter to OC? They could ignore it since they already have their money. If they do nothing, what is the next course of action? My partner has a lawyer on retainer. Should he go through the lawyer? I believe my partner does not want to because he feels uncomfortable telling the lawyer to have a legitimate negative portion of the Credit Report removed simply because it hurts his credit score. Any thoughts? Anyway... have a nice day!
Re: Doc - "Litigious nutcase letter Hello and welcome! I've had success with the LN letter, but I didnt start off with it. I started with a polite, concise letter basically saying "hey, this is wrong, please look into it and write me back, thanks". Then, I dispute with the CRAs. After its verified and/or the OC ignores that first nice letter, you could send the nutcase and dispute again w CRAs, however I waited and sent one more letter before i resorted to the LN. It was sorta like "HEY, i already wrote you about this once, and you ignored me. I disputed it with the CRAs, but it was verified. how can you verify this account with them but not with me?" also...hopefully the OC, whom has no permissible purpose to pull your report, will be curious (and stupid) enough to pull your report, and violate the law. if they do, its a violation, and can be used as leverage in you letters to get the TL removed. I don't know why, but I don't think you should just blast them with a nutcase letter without starting off clueless and nice first. That way, you look like a person who genuinely feels 'wronged' and is discovering that there are laws out there that protect the consumer. this is the way i did it, and it worked. some people may disagree and say they've had success with the LN letters by using them right off the bat. a lot of it is luck probably, lol. One more thing....This part of your post: tells me that you need to read here a bit more. Have you read the FAQs and 'sticky' posts? make sure you do that....and good luck to you!
Re: Doc - "Litigious nutcase letter he feels uncomfortable telling the lawyer to have a legitimate negative portion of the Credit Report removed simply because it hurts his credit score. Any thoughts? edithpiaf ===================== So he should pay higher insurance and loan rates while those who repaired their credit avoid such rip offs RITE! Why Should he let them violate his legal rights? He needs to read all of this ----->*** Victims of Credit Reporting *** http://members.aol.com/victcrdrpt/Score.html ..
