I could really use some advice from someone who knows more about the oh-so crappy credit system than I do: I moved, and had a cable bill go into collections. I thought I was paid in full with the cable company. I was wrong. Anyway, I went back to Comcast (the cable company), and paid the bill with a check. The check states that the payment represents payment in full and closure of the account. The question that I have is this: If I paid Comcast for the debt, doesn't that mean that CMI could never have really had a right to collect the debt in the first place. In other words: why would Comcast collect the debt from me if they had sold the right to collect the debt to CMI? In other/other words: can't I make the argument that I have never been provided a service BY CMI, never owed any money TO CMI, and therefore, I can tell CMI to go to hell and get off of my credit report? The item on my credit report has the following information: (naturally, I am omitting or altering any information that those sneaky infamous Creditnet spies might use to identify me) Balance: 0 Loan Type: COLLECTION AGENCY / ATTORNEY Remarks: PLACED FOR COLLECTION 02/2003 Pay Status: PAYMENT AFTER CHARGE OFF / COLLECTION Account Type: OPEN ACCOUNT Responsibility: INDIVIDUAL ACCOUNT If anyone has any input, Iâ??d love to hear it (especially concerning the protocol on transferring or â??sellingâ? debts by one entity to another. If you are reading this post, thanks for the attention...
There are several relationships between collection agencies and creditors. If the creditor sold the account to the collection agency, then you paid the wrong company, they would of easily screwed you and kept the money and not have informed the collection agency of payment having been accepted. That would put you in a fix of still owing the collection agency. If the creditor just assigned the account and you paid the creditor, you might try to get the creditor to retract the collection agency since you paid the account, but some collection agencies have agreements with creditors that they are not allowed to do that, that they just forward payment there by the collection agency still maintains the reporting. Worth a try though, go back to creditor and dispute with them. Get everything in writing.
Nightstar, I actually have a letter from the original creditor. I got it after I had reached an agreement with them that they would remove all traces of this account from my credit reports. After I got the letter, I settled the account. In the letter the individual at the original creditor says that they got in touch with the collection agency and instructed the collection agency to "remove the listing". I interpret this to mean that the collection agency must remove all traces of information about this item in my credit report, rather than just updating it as paid. I certainly hope that the creditor didn't have an agreement with the collection agency stating that they would not remove listings. That would make the agreement that they made with me to remove the listing pretty void. I wonder if I should sue the original creditor? I have a letter on their letterhead to submit to the court. I have sent a copy of this letter to TransUnion. The problem is that they just freaking ignore it, leaving the listing as a collection account with a zero balance. This is the thing I really cannot understand. I thought I was golden when I sent them a copy of this letter. I was so CERTAIN that this would compel them to remove the listing. So much for certainty when you are dealing with the CRAs. Thanks for the input. Take it easy. GABOOZ
http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2004/04/cra.htm Send a copy of that letter to the FTC for their dispute referral system, hopefully it will get deleted if they get involved with helping you.
"That would make the agreement that they made with me to remove the listing pretty void." No, the agreement you made with the original creditor is not void just because they may, or may not have some agreement with this CA, or any other party. You have no obligation to somehow audit all the agreements a company you are negotiating with might have. Those hypothetical agreements are not your concern. You reached an agreement (a contract) with the original creditor. You performed your obligation, paying according to the agreement, based on an expectation that they would likewise meet their obligations under the agreement. Their obligation under your agreement was documented in writing by their letter. What you have is a breach of your contract by the original creditor. Your next step is to notify them that they are in breach of the contract, and demand that they comply promptly as agreed by having the CA remove the listing as agreed. You should include in your demand a copy of their letter, a copy of your credit report (with other tradelines blocked out), and a copy of your proof of payment (copy of your check or checks). Once you have a contract, you have to hold the parties to it. Your contract is with the original creditor, so there is where you put the pressure. If they fail to correct, you may wish to take legal action. It is not worth it to them, or the CA, over a debt that has been settled, with the terms of settlement in writing on their letterhead. Regardless of what they or the CA might claim regarding your agreement, the plain language of their own letter makes such a defense likely to be costly. Make sure you have proof of your payments in accordance with the settlement. (I am not an attorney.)
"In the letter the individual at the original creditor says that they got in touch with the collection agency and instructed the collection agency to "remove the listing". " In negotiating with you, they represented that they were the owner of the debt, and that the CA was their agent, and acting at their direction. The CA's failure to comply with the OC's agreement with you is the OC's failure to comply.
Ontrack, Wow, those posts are quite helpful. I think I just got so accustomed to the CAs and the CRAs being the &*$#@s all the time, that I forgot that the OC can be just as (o.k., I'll be nice) "negligent". I will send a letter far more professional (less delusional) sounding than the content of this post to the OC alleging that they have failed to honor the contract that we had between us. I will definitely update this post as the plot thickens. Although you have assured me that you are not an attorney, I'd just like to say that, while your advice resembles that of an attorney, your fees are quite reasonable. Take care of yourself, Ontrack. Thanks again, GABOOZ
