Yup, that's my thought. Trout, if you have 6 months, don't settle with them. Send them something to the effect of: Dear RMA Slimebuckets: [insert something here about how you came to learn of the debt.] As per my rights under the FDCPA, I am asking you to provide validation of this debt. This is not a refusal to pay, but rather a request for proof that I have some contractual obligation to pay you. Please note that I am not looking for "verification" that you have my name and mailing address, but rather solid proof that this debt is mine and that I am obligated to pay it. I have been advised that this debt is past the Statute of Limitations for collection in my state of [insert state here]. Due to this fact, with the exception of any validation and/or any information specifically requested by me, you must cease and desist from calling, mailing, or otherwise contacting me regarding this debt. [look this part up, but in some states it's considered extortion to try and collect on a debt that is time-barred. if it is, insert a sentence along the lines of "you should also be aware that in the state of XX, continued collection activity on a time-barred debt can be considered extortion and subject to criminal prosecution."] It has also been brought to my attention that it is likely that you have re-aged this debt, since the underlying debt has already been deleted from my credit files as the reporting period has expired. This is a blatant and flagrant violation of the FCRA, and as such, is subject to a civil penalty of $1000 plus attorney's fees and court costs. Please be advised that I will have no hesitation in exercising my legal options in federal or civil courts regarding this matter should you not immediately provide validation and then delete the tradeline entirely, and furnish to me a copy of the UDF that you submit to the credit reporting bureaus by December 15, 2002. Sincerely, Trout *************************** Of course, if anyone has anything to add or correct, please feel free to do so.
that's a pretty good outline. you might also want to enter some of the more legal sounding phrases from the sample validation letters.
Absolutely it is extortion... however, I'm dealing with the exact same thing with RMA and they are impossible. If trout is really pressed for time, this may be the easiest way out since lord knows RMA takes their precious time doing anything. My feeling with RMA is that they only understand two things-- settlement or lawsuit. So if you don't plan on settling, be prepared to file suit. PS. I do like the letter and its always worth a try, 6 months is a ways down the road... I think you can afford to test your alternatives
Great letters! I think we can construct something pretty serious for them...perhaps enough for them to atleast date it correctly so it will fall off like the original. man, i appreciate you guys.
The 180 days is a time frame within which an OC MUST charge-off. The old system allowed them to charge-off any time they wanted. They would often wait a cpl. years before doing that. This would add years to the potential reporting period. From the Johnson Opinion, August 31, 1998 ; ... it is our view that the delinquency that led to the charge-off "commenced" in January 1997, the month the first payment was missed. Thus, that is the month and year that the creditor must report to the CRA, and that the CRA must use to calculate the time period dictated by Section 605. We've had this discussion at length. "Equifax and the 7 year reporting period". It has some good info. on this. http://consumers.creditnet.com/straighttalk/board/showthread.php?s=&pgnum=&postid=256169#post256169 And another; Rpt Date vs. Last Activity Date???? http://consumers.creditnet.com/stra...=263536&highlight="and+the+7+year"#post263536 The 180 days from the date of original delinquency is language that was added to the FCRA in the 96 revisions, (the CCRR). Any item that makes it's way to your report prior to Jan 1, 98 must follow the OLD system. The old system says the clock starts from the date of original delinquency. So RMA did reage the account.
trout, some contact information. When I dealt with them I sent letters to: Nicole Cummings Fax# 770-232-2493 and to Mare Zak Fax# 716-564-6261 Also, here's there website http://www.rmainc.net/about/locations.asp and their BBB information http://www.atlanta.bbb.org/common.h...is67/report.php&bureau=atlanta&compid=6001079 When I dealt with them, they were stubborn as you mention, but I validated and disputed with the CRA's at the same time. The derog was deleted in about 3 or 4 months. I asked for validation twice - no response, then sent Estoppel - no response, but it was deleted. Don't settle yet! As others have said, you have a few months to begin the process. I'm VERY confident that you will get this deleted.
has anyone asked for a procedural request for a verified RMA tradeline? I just wonder if anyone has had EQ respond...
I've requested this info from EQ. They responded with just the address and phone number. RMA has so many *DBA's*. My tradeline was originally listed as "Purchased Paper LLC", so I had no idea who this company was. After hours of searching I determined it was RMA. They are tough to get deleted. I just continually disputed and requested validation. It took a few months, but I finally got it done.
I will send RMA a letter friday. you guys are right, I shouldnt just give up and pay, when they are breaking the law. i should have a little time before closing, so I'll see what I can get accomplished between now and then. I'll fight for deletion.
,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,,.,,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,., Did you FAX the validation or send crrr?
"ATLANTA, October 19, 2000 â?? As part of a continued strategy to concentrate the focus of each of its two core businesses, Equifax (NYSE: EFX) today announced it has sold its collection services business, Equifax Risk Management Services (ERMS), in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom. The U.S. operation, headquartered in Atlanta with 1700 employees in 13 locations, has become part of Risk Management Alternatives Parent, Inc. (RMA), also headquartered in Atlanta. ERMS operations in Canada with 500 employees and in the UK with 150 employees have been purchased by IntelliRisk Management Corporation (IRMC) of Columbus, Ohio." Okay, they are not *affiliated* with Eq, but RMA bought Eq's collection agency. That's enough for Eq to be bias when investigating an RMA account. Throw that up in their faces. RMA is Equifax's CA??????????
Re: Re: I guess I'll settle w/RMA for $566 I would offer them $100 as payment in full, with removal of all derogatory information contained on all credit reports (including the monthly inquiries). If you don't settle, and the debt falls off can't they still attempt to collect? For example, continue pulling monthly inquiries? Just my two cents.
Re: Re: I guess I'll settle w/RMA for $566 You should also realize the remaining part of the debt you did not pay they will just sell to another CA. I bet you anything in the next 6-8 months you get another CA tradeline for the remaining balance. RMA has been reaging sears accounts for awhile. I think there is a contact with RMA just for this very thing. Let me check around.
Re: Re: I guess I'll settle w/RMA for $566 call this #. A few people on another board had good luck since RMA reaged accounts and they know it. Start out nice then get nasty if you have to. Just tell them they reaged the debt, you have proof on old credit reports, it is past the SOL, and you need it removed right away.
Re: Re: I guess I'll settle w/RMA for $566 duh here it is Renia M. Billingsley Compliance Response Analyst (678)417-8587
