I am going to file suit against GMAC in small claims court tomorrow for information they are reporting on my wife's credit reports. I have been disputing this only negative left on my wife's credit reports for the last 7 months with both GMAC and the CRA's. The only CRA which currently is reporting negatively about this GMAC account is Experian. It was deleted from Equifax and it is showing as PAID/NEVER LATE on TransUnion. To give everyone a little background on this matter, my wife and her ex-husband purchased a car and financed it through GMAC in 1992. As part of the divorce my wife kept the car and continued to make payments on it until it was paid in 1997. We owe nothing to GMAC. GMAC states on my wifes Experian credit report that she was late at least 30 times during the history of the loan, but GMAC will not produce any documentation to prove this is the case. I will not say she was never late, but I know when I met her she had only had the car a little while and I helped her make the payments on this car and subsequently married her and continued to remain current on the loan until it was paid off. I wrote GMAC in May of this year telling them I was in dispute about the information they are reporting and that I wanted a full accounting furnsihed to me about the information they are supplying, if they could not supply the information I suggested as an offer of goodwill that they update the account to reflect, PAID/NEVER LATE . Afte GMAC received and signed for my letter, I then immediately disputed this account with CRA Experian. In 30 days the results came and it stated...GMAC REMAINS! There was no notation of "In dispute" when Experian contacted GMAC, despite GMAC having full knowledge I was disputing this with them. Shortly after that I get a letter from GMAC stating they stand by the information they report and to take it up with the CRA's. Duh?? Didn't the read my letter? Because if they did it would have told them I was in constant dispute monthly with the CRA's over the account and it was now time to deal with GMAC themselves. Now again I must remind you they are reporting this account with CRA TransUnion as PAID/NEVER LATE?? I think in court showing the judge both credit reports should clearly show GMAC furnishing inaccurate information. I contacted the credit manager and we went at it back and forth for about 2 months while I educated him on the finer aspects of PA law and the FCRA and what I wanted him to do and what they were required to do by law. Again this moron acknowledged no wrong doing on the part of GMAC and refused to correct or update the information. I then faxed him a copy of the actual lawsuit I am filing and he faxed me back a letter stating he has contacted the CRA's and he supplied me a copy of their UDF stating the account as in dispute by me. Little too late don't ya think?? He said if I wanted to contimue on with the suit to go ahead and that they aren't changing a thing. No my problem is this....the UDF lists the information to be supplied to the CRA's and list the CRA's as Experian, Equifax and TransUnion and next to each on it has some electronic serial number. It restates the negative account information and at the bottom he has written, "Customer disputes past account history". I can see what is going to happen now......TransUnion will get this and update the account as being negative with all the lates showing. Equifax will now re-report the account that I got deleted in May from a previous dispute...Yeah, I know they can't do that, they must certify and give notice, Yada, yada, yada....from my experience with them they don't give a rats ass and will gladly re-report and relist the account back on no matter what I say to them. I do not want this to happen! Therefore they have left me no other recourse but to file suit against GMAC and this credit manager. I couldn't have been fairer in letting them simply delete the account in lieu of me not filing suit against them. I hope when it gets to their attorney he will have commonsense to see that he should delete the account immediately as GMAC has nothing to gain and everything to lose. I am crossing my fingers in the hopes I can accomplish this. As far as I'm concerned I have documented proof of GMAC's willful violations and I am ready if need be to take this all the way to court. I appreciate anyone's opinions on this. I will be filing this suit first thing in the morning. Thanks! Tac
What is your proof they are in error, other than your belief that your wife only had the car for a 'little while.' Do you have cancelled checks or bank statements?
The proof is I have one credit report stating all the lates and I have another credit report from a different CRA stating the account is PAID/NEVER LATE. It would be safe to say I can prove just by showing those 2 different credit reports that they are furnishing information with actual knowledge of errors. Which credit report is one to believe?? You can't supply contradicting information about the same account and say that you are supplying accurate information? Where is the notice of dispute? I have definetly told them of my dispute for the past several months and have documented proof that they received it, yet they keep right on verifying the information with the CRA's when contacted by them without mentioning this little notice. This would also construe to me that they are reporting information with actual knowledge of errors since they are not reporting the account as in dispute, they are therefore not reporting accurate and complete information about the account. I even wrote them a letter alerted them of their violations and to correct such immediately. They failed to do so, this would constitute willful misconduct since they were alerted by me to this fact. PA law is pretty clear on the notice of dispute thing as well. What response was I to give to the mortgage place when they stated and asked about the negative and positive listing furnished by GMAC? I stated I was in dispute over this account with GMAC but it clearly did not state this on her CR to the Mortgage place or he would already knew I was in the process of taking care of it. This is in sharp contrast to what he said about a collections account which did the proper thing and complied with the law by listing the account as in dispute. He clearly stated to me..."I see your already taking care of this one." And that my friends is the reason the law is clear about listing an account in dispute once a furnisher is in contact with a consumer. I will have no problem showing and proving damages. You know what the difference is in a negative tradeline and what that can do to the intrest rate of a mortgage?? I do, I have a certified and notorized letter from the mortgage broker stating such. Thanks for the reply! Tac
I would think that the simple fact they are listed on the reports differently shows the error. However, I have seen some people post here that judges do not always look at it from a straight error point of view. If a judge thinks you were late he may not side with you, especially in small claims where the rules are more lax. A quicker and less costly solution may be to file a complaint with your Attorney Generals office using the TILA as your basis. I had the same problem as you with a CC company not wanting to provide an accounting of the account. I sent them a CRRR letter quoting the TILA and after 30 days filed a complaint with the AG's office. The AG's office sent a letter to the CC company and the CC company responded that they would be removing the account from all CRA's. Entire process took less than 60 days. Personally I would use a lawsuit as a last resort. Others disagree but I feel that if you go before a judge with your paperwork and then a AG's letter you have a better chance because it will look like you used the legal system as your last resort. So far I have not had to file any lawsuits, the AG's office has done the trick. These companies won't try and give a line to the AG's office, they will follow the law when they are involved. At least that has been my experience.
As long as you have cancelled checks and such there should be no reason that GMAC should not update the account information. Aren't they concerned abou this? Dani PS Are you the same Tac that posts to the Bayhouse forum?
Yes, I am the same Tac. I would have to disagree with my experience using the AG's office. They will write and respond on your behalf but that is about it. I have already filed the suit about and hour ago. Even if for one minute the lates are justified this does not explain their reporting the same account differently. This is actual knowledge of errors plain and simple. The debt is paid in full with GMAC. What I really want out of them is the deletion and not money but I will use that as leverage once their attorney contact's me. Let us say for one minute that reporting errors aren't an issue here and that they are reporting it correctly and have proof to back it up. There is still the issue of them not listing the account as in dispute from the 5 previous letters I have that they signed letting them know of the dispute and their violations of the laws. Based on that simple fact alone which I can easily prove, they are guilty. They only sent me a UDF stating they will list the account as in dispute after the fact that I told them the date I would file my suit. A little too late as far as I'm concerned. Tac
I agree with your position, however don't be absolutely certain that a judge will side with you. I would definately try and settle without going to court. Small Claims Judges are not always sticklers for the strict letter of the law. If GMAC comes in and shows the lates are accurate the Judge may just let them put that on all reports and say it is an accurate account of the history on the account. He may not care that GMAC didn't do it in the correct manner as long as it is now listed correctly. He may view a correct accounting of the account as more important than how they got to that end point. Never assume anything with Small Claims Judges, most aren't in that court by choice. One thing I have learned is there are no guarantees when going into court. Get all your paperwork together and cancelled checks. You will need as much proof as you can that the account is wrong. The Judge may be more interested in the history on the account than he is is some procedural issue. There have been many posts here by people who have gone into Small Claims thinking they had a good case only to be fooled. Just get everything together and cover all your bases. Don't assume you have a slam dunk case, be prepared. I may be reading too much into your posts, but you seem to think this is a slam dunk and no way will a Judge side with GMAC. Don't get blindsided or suprised, there is never a slam dunk in a Court of Law. Just be prepared for any possible scenario they throw at you. These cases rarely go as you suspect they will, a quick search of Small Claims here will show that. Luckily my AG's office is very good and I haven't had to go to Small Claims.
round1234, why are you fighting tac14033 on this?? You state "Personally I would use a lawsuit as a last resort". also "So far I have not had to file any lawsuits". How can You Shoot down using Small Claims Courts? Put down your protest signe Please. The facts are just that, regardless of your view. It appears tac14033 has followed all the course, so don't detour. Do You work for the Attorney General's Office? Yes i'm preparing to get a Small Claims done, and it bothers me when Salt is thrown in any aspect of the Game.
backspace, I am sorry, but round has every right to state her view. Tac came on here asking for opinions and round gave hers. If he does not wish to follow it that is one thing, but she has every right to make it. Dani
Point well taken, but in all my time here which has been less than yours considering the post, and more than round with the same factors, I've never seen or heard anyone saying not to use the courts. It may just be me Dani but i interpreted the post different, and since it sounds like you know "her" better than i there it is. I've been wrong before on this board and shortly apologized for it. If so now again that would be revisited, more importantly this is a credit weapon board and fighting amongst the troops prooves nothing. I'm just making sure we're all shooting in the same direction......
I think you need to read my posts again with an open mind, I never said to not use the courts in your fight. What I did say and I still stand behind is the courts should be used as a last resort ONLY. I never said the Courts should NEVER be used. I was simply pointing out to him that once he gets into Court be prepared. His case is not a slam dunk as he thinks and I can guarantee if he goes in with that thought he will more than likely lose. If you go into Court thinking you have a slam dunk case I can guarantee you WILL lose because you have not put the preparation in that a Court Case of any type requires. Preparation is the key to success and the key for disaster is that you think will win because you have documentation that they did not follow the Procedure of the Law. Small Claims Judges are not as concerned about procedures as they are correcting wrongs. That is the whole purpose of Small Claims, get to the bottom line and not the legal letter of the law. A simple search on Creditnet with the keywork "small claims" will reveal many a person here who went into Small Claims Courts with all kinds of violations only to be shot down by the Judge because they were not prepared. They thought violations were enough and that is just not the case with every Judge.
Believe me, I feel your pain. I have clear reports and they were a mess for 8 years. But what is listed on the other credit bureaus isn't going to be proof in court that you actually had no lates. I know in my case that Experian had a valid charge off the other two didn't carry. I have no idea whether you were late 30 times or not, I would tend to believe Experian. They've got 30 seperate notations with dates that it was late? You've got to counter it with some evidence.
I appreciate your opinions.....You guys are missing the point and I also see your view of things. Yes the small claims judge can use his ideals and way of thinking into this but......The law was written for a reason and he must follow it if there is a violation of such. If he does not then I have an absolute power to appeal his decision based on that. His say is not the final say for either party. I must also point out that I have been before this judge 3 times and he in fact does rely very heavily on the law. On August 8th, 2002 I was awarded a $2060.50 judgement by him against a collection agency. The fact is I really don't need to bring any checks to prove inaccurate information is being reported. I have 2 different credit reports stating different things. GMAC has supplied this information and how can they state that both are correct?? They can't be! There is also the issue again regarding no notice of dispute. I think I have them on this if any thing and from previous dealings with this judge it did make a difference if the furnisher abided by this law. So far he has found all three previous people I took to court willfully guiltly on this law. I have a feeling this will be settled out of court but I am prepared to go the distance if need be, I have nothing to lose. I must also add that I do not abuse the court system, this is my last resort. In other words all means of settling this have failed at this point. Thanks for the replies! Tac
I am sorry but I have to agree with Tac on this one to the exclusion of all else. The reason: GMAC's violations are clear. They did not mark in dispute. end of that story and violation #1. There is no getting around it and the law is very clear. They are reporting different info on different reports for the same account. violation #2. The fact is Tac is right on. The credit reports speak for themselves. The credit reports and the laws pertaining to this subject matter is all the prove she needs to prive violations. Which is the reason she is bringing suit. The point everyone is missing here is that GMAC had their chance to correct inaccurate data on her reports. They didn't. So when they get to court it will no longer be about was she late or wasn't she. It will be did GMAC violate the law or didn't they. From Tac's posts I would have to say the answer is a resounding YES!
i second Robin's point. If GMAC is providing accurate info, then each CRA report should be reporting the same information (all other things being equal). The CRA is not making up the info that they are reporting, they are getting it from GMAC... so by not reporting accurate info (which report is correct... who knows) and not notating report in dispute they are clearly violating!
Tac Be sure and keep us posted with your progress. Have you been given a Court date yet? I do wish you luck and will be curious to see how this turns out for you.
I just received a court date in the mail from the Court for October 4th, 2002 @ 10:15am. Their registered agent should be served sometime today or tomorrow so I expect a call from GMAC soon. I will let everyone know how it goes. Thanks! Tac
It got continued until October 18th, @ 10:30am, they made notice that they intend to defend at this time. I keep everyone updated after court that day. Tac
My caveat on this subject - you should remember that because 1 or 2 CRAs changed the account to P/NL doesn't mean they Actually checked with GMAC. I have a couple accounts that I disputed across the board. Acct A - 1 CRA deleted, 1 changed to PIF, 1 remained unchanged Acct B - 2 deleted, 1 remained unchanged We have no way of telling how thorough the verification processes are for each account by each CRA. I don't think the judge is going to buy "Look at my other reports". However, I'm glad to see you're not rolling over for GMAC. I'm very curious as to why they can't provide the specific late payment info. Good luck !!
