I have been dealing with bad credit for several years now following a foreclosure. I've worked hard trying to rebuild, doing things on my own, and was finally able to buy a house with a private lender and converted it this past December to a conventional conforming loan. The foreclosure was almost 4 years ago, but it and the surrounding credit problems persist. As part of the refinance package, the lender required that I pay off all derogatories out of loan proceeds. I agreed in order to get the loan. Now they have sent me checks made out to the creditors that I must send them. I don't want to send the checks without getting something in return. I was able to negotiate with the lawyer in charge of the one judgment I had to accept settlement. I live in NC, and supposedly a judgement will only remain for 5 years when it has been paid, 7 if not. 5 years would have been up in October 2006. I also negotiated with one CA who held 3 accounts to completely delete them in exchange for payment. The CA's office was in my city and so I just went down there and made the deal. Now I've got checks for a few more, but they're out of town or national CA's. I would like to negotiate with each of them and barter payment for deletion. Does anyone have an opinion on the best way to do that? I don't want to open a can of worms and despite going through this process blindly, I haven't made too many bad mistakes (except maybe dragging this out much longer than necessary). One other sticky wicket. I have a collection that dropped off of EQ and TU in June 2006. It should have also dropped from EX at the same time. One of the mistakes I may have made was filing a dispute with EX in January of 2006. EX supposedly verified the charge and kept it on my report. When fall rolled around and it hadn't dropped, I called EX and asked why. The person I talked to said that the debt had been verified and would remain on my credit until 2010. Why would it get a 4 year bump, not 7, and was it because of the dispute? I actually have a check for this account as well, but I hate to send it to them. Do I have any recourse? It's now going on year 8 on my EX report! Thanks!
That's a good question and hopefully someone will answer. If a may, I'd like to add to your question - If there is something on my credit that is set to expire in a couple of years, should I dispute. Can disputing backfire? When does the 7 year benchmark start and can it keep being reset? I've got a stack of dispute letters ready to mail, but I think I'll hold on and see some answers here. I don't mean to hijack the original thread, but I felt my question was in the same direction.
I think your question dovetails right into what I experienced. I know in my case, a dispute has seemed to bump my derogatory item for another 4 years. I'm still wondering about the 4 year thing. When the creditor responded to EX that the debt was valid, my score immediately dropped 30 or 40 points (I can't remember exactly, but it was significant). I was a 668 with EX in December of 2005. The dispute occurred in Jan '06, and today I have just struggled back to a 637 with EX (all according to their con-sumer "My Plus Score" product). I had worked from a 571 to the 668 over a 3-4 year period and it seemed to me that time and re-establishing credit were the only things that really helped me then. Of course, I didn't know about this site then! It seems to me that if it's an older debt and getting close to fall off, it's better to leave it. I'll let you know in a few weeks what impact an older debt may have. I've got a couple that are about 4 years old that are being deleted from my file. I'm checking daily, so hopefully as they come off I'll be able to see just how much of an impact they made individually. Of course getting them deleted is quite different from disputing. If it truly is a valid debt, I think you've got a slim chance disputing it.
Search the site for some "Pay for Delete" and similar agreements. There's no reason you can do that with the rest of your accounts like you did in person. It just might take longer through the fax or e-mail. You might also let the lender know that you're working with the creditors to make the payment arrangements so they know what's going on.
Will I run a risk of having them restart the clock with my credit reports if they don't want to delete them? All of them are old debts, so they'll be off in a couple of years anyway, but it was a stipulation of my loan, so I've got to deal with it now. I figure my best case is deletion, and I would think they would be happy to have the accounts settled as old as they are. But... who knows what some of them might do. Will talking to them restart the clock?
It's not clear how much negotiating room you have. If there's no particular time frame for you to pay off the accounts, then you can start the process of letter-writing, or phoning and faxing and, when the terms are right, pay the bill. OTOH, if you have a deadline (and the collection agents can "smell" that) then you're going to be in a much more difficult spot. But if you've already been approved for the refinance, what's the problem? Sure, you'll have some "paid" collections instead of some un-paid ones, but even if you end up without getting them deleted as part of the pay-off, you can still challenge them if they change the dates or they don't fall off after their time is up. So, while you should still try for the PFD, if that doesn't work out, it's still not the end of the world.
RE: "the clock" you might reset the SOL clock by making a payment, but so-what, they'll be paid off. The "drop-off-the-credit-report" clock should remain un-changed. If it changes, you can challenge that.
So they should drop off the credit report at the same time regardless? The big deal I have about this is that I'm trying to get my credit in the 680-720 range minimum so I can qualify for stated income or no docs loans. I've been doing some investing, but I've got all my cash tied up and need bridge loans, and long term loans to make everything work. With a lower score, they require full docs and then I get into a DTI ratio problem. With investment lenders, it's all about credit score and LTV. If they're both 'good', then they don't have a problem going stated income/assets or no docs altogether. That gives me a lot more room to work. With my current scores, the question comes down to whether I can get a loan of any kind at all - forget about what strings are attached. Primary residence and auto loans seem a little easier to get - perhaps because they're necessities. It seems more difficult if the item is a luxury or investment. Maybe it's just me. I've struggled up from 500's and I'm just trying to get it up that last golden stretch.
As an addendum, I just noticed today that the 3 accounts that are to be deleted showed up on Experian as paid. They are from end of 2003 and beginning of 2004 and there was no change in my Experian score. I'm assuming when they're deleted altogether there will be some increase? I confirmed that they are to be ultimately deleted, not just marked paid, but I sure hope there's a little bump when they are deleted. They are about the most recent derogs I've got, but they were medical so I guess that makes a little difference.
I am obviously very new here and don't know how to post my own question separately...any help would be appreciated...however, here is my question...(I hope someone will still answer) 1. I disputed a CA account on my experian CR for RJM Acquisitions, LLC for $94.00 for some book club that I have no knowledge of...there is no phone number on the credit report to contact. Experian replied today and said that the item has been verified and remains...now, I thought I read something on here somewhere that said that they have to have all accurate information? 2. How can they verify with no phone number? 3. What should I do next?
Perhaps a mod can split this post off and make a new topic for you. In the meantime, Send a Debt Valadation letter to the Collection Agency. There are several examples of them here on the board. Don't get too fancy, just tell them you have no idea what this debt is for. Ask them the same questions that are swimming around in your head.... What book Club, What they think you bought, how did they get the figure $94, who bought the stuff and why are you liable for it, and if it was purchased from the book club why should anyone pay them (RJM)? As for the phone number, that's fine. They don't have to provide a phone number and it's probably best that they don't. Collectors spend 40-50 hours a week on the phone and are very skilled at using it to get you to say things that you don't mean. Trust me they will get you to make a statement that out of context can be used later to make it seem like you admit the debt is yours. Best advice, STAY OFF THE PHONE. Send letters, the mailman is going to their office everyday anyway, he wont mind dropping off your letter while he's there.
I have just recently found out that the derogatory item on Experian didn't get bumped 4 years as I thought. As it turns out, when I disputed the item, the CA reported back that there was a late payment in 2003. That's why it is scheduled to continue until 2010. Funny they didn't report that to EX and TU (I didn't file disputes with them on that item). Also it's funny that the account was closed in 1999 and I have made no payments since then nor have I communicated with them. There's no way anything could have happened in 2003. I'm in the process of requesting Validation. Is there anything else I can do about this?
And therin lies your 'in' so to speak. The late payment in 2003 is obviously incorrect, and CRA don't like to delete unless the TL was reported in error or incorrect. All of a sudden, this TL isn't reporting correctly.
Can I take that up with Experian then? They 'verified' the debt in Jan 2006, but I didn't know what was going on until lately. I wasn't going to mess with it because it was supposed to drop off last year. I only found out about the "late payment" after talking to an EX rep on the phone.
The account is also illegally "re-aged". The CA has erroneously reported the original date of delinquency as 2003. As a result, the CRA is still reporting an obsolete account past the 7 years allowed by law. Even if you HAD made a payment in 2003, that payment would NOT have restarted the 7 year reporting period. To become delinquent again, you would have had to bring the account current, and then become delinquent. No payment to a CA in 2003 could have done that. If it went delinquent in 1999, then it should either already be off your reports, or if it went delinquent in Dec. 1999, then it should fall off by July 2007, 7.5 years later.
Is there case law or statute that addresses re-aging? I've read FCRA and FDCPA and haven't been able to make heads or tails about that specific point. I've also seen conflicting information about that here.
I spoke with an Experian rep and she said that they had not reported it delinquent until Mar. 2003. She said that I could not go by the date the account was closed or the DOLA. She said I would have to contact the OC and take it up with them. I told her that Experian was in violation of the FCRA by reporting it, but she just repeated her mantra. I have dug around all day trying to find old credit reports that would show that it was reported prior to March 2003, but I haven't dug up anything yet. How can I prove they were reporting it delinquent prior to that - and should I even be trying to prove that. If it was first delinquent in 1999, shouldn't that be the date regardless? I've sent validation letters to BoA, but have received no response yet, so I figure that's just a time intensive process waiting for responses to all the letters and finally filing a lawsuit. If it should turn out that she's correct about them first reporting to EX in March 2003, then what recourse do I have? TU and EQ both dropped the account in June 2006 indicating that they had a 1999 date they were working from. Any ideas on the best way to attack this? I don't know how to prove my side of the argument absent a providential finding of documents, but there has to be a way to hold their feet to the fire!
"If it was first delinquent in 1999, shouldn't that be the date regardless? " Yes. That is exactly what FCRA says. If you know they are wrong, that the account should NOT be on your reports, and you can also show damages, then sue. You obtain the documents by discovery. That is how you hold their feet to the fire. They may produce NO documents, in which case they cannot show ANY justification to report at all, or they may produce statements that show when the account was actually closed. Most likely, they decide to cut their losses, and you reach an agreement to delete it. Either way, you get it off.
I sent Experian their own CreditUpdate(sm) report from 1999 showing the account was reported back then as 120 days late with an "ASSN CODE" of 2 which I think indicated a closed account. That should prove that the account was being reported adversely prior to March 2003. Experian sent me a response 7 days later that states, The bold is their emphasis. I truncated some of the verbiage for space, but preserved the part relevant to this. What the heck? What did I just send them? I have just filed a complaint with the FTC against both Experian and Bank of America, but I don't know how far I'll get with that. What is my next step in proceeding with a lawsuit? That looks like the only way I'll ever get this one off.
