Have a collection account that I sent a request for validation in hopes that I could gain some leverage for deletion upon payment. Sent the validation and then disputed with the CRA upon receipt of my green card. I have not yet received validation from the CA, however, it was verified to the CRA. BUT . . . it is now listed as "NO STATUS" (was "collection account") with no account history (it is listed as "Account in dispute under Fair Credit Billing Act") and my EXP FAKO score went up 10 points. It does show the balance as of 5/2003 and is still listed in the "Potentially Negative Items" section of my CR. Is there a violation here, given that they did verify the account prior to validating it? Can I expect my score to go up even more if I get the TL deleted? Thanks!
Interestingly, I disputed the account on both EXP and TU. Just checked PG and while it basically reflects the changes made on my EXP report, TU remains unchanged. The 30-day CRA dispute window ends on 7/23, so I'll be interested to see what happens on TU. As an aside, on PG the account on EXP now shows up with a balance of "0" and is listed as an "Other" under collection accounts (previously was "Delinquent"), so I suppose that it is still affecting my score, albeit to a lesser extent.
Since it was already on your CR, they had to mark it in dispute...sounds like what they did. Aren't you just lucky?
Yeah, if it weren't for bad luck, I'd have no luck at all -- LOL! So . . . the fact that they marked the account as being disputed, but still verified covers them? Can it sit this way forever? Do they ever have to resolve the dispute?
Re: Re: I'm Totally Confused!!! Re: I'm Totally Confused!!! merlin | 74 posts since Jun 2003 64.165.226.69 | 07.16.2003 @ 14:38 Yeah, if it weren't for bad luck, I'd have no luck at all -- LOL! So . . . the fact that they marked the account as being disputed, but still verified covers them? Can it sit this way forever? Do they ever have to resolve the dispute?
Re: Re: Re: I'm Totally Confused!!! I went back and reread the Cass opinion letter. http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fdcpa/letters/cass.htm Look at No. 4 in particular. Very confusing! Almost a non-answer. Since it has been changed to a no status, no account history, and under dispute, I bet they have met their burden. But if they had marked it in dispute, and left the amounts, etc., on there, would they have? This was asked a while back, and I don't think we ever came up with a real answer. Is this when the estoppel and ITS become a big issue? If you send estoppel, then dispute again with the CRA, as something like "furnisher has never validated per FDCPA this debt, please delete", and THEN the CA verifies again, would that be where you have the violation? I've never been in this situation, but I sure would like to know some of the legal eagles thoughts.
Re: Re: Re: I'm Totally Confused!!! Is this a new way to get around the laws? (or maybe an old way that I just haven't read about yet?)
I'm not sure if they are getting around the law, or actually abiding by it. There is a first time for everything!
It seems to me (for what that's worth) that if they are technically abiding by the law, it is a great loophole. Theoretically, wouldn't this be a great way to extort money? ** Pay me $500 ** I don't owe you $500 -- where's your proof? ** I don't need to prove it. I'll just put it on your credit report as a collection account with no status and mark it "in dispute." Your credit score will be affected and if you apply for a mortgage, they'll make you settle this anyway. Now pay me my $500 or I'll add interest and fees.
