According to the FDCPA "Using any language or symbol, other than the debt collector's address, on any envelope when communicating with a consumer by use of the mails or by telegram, except that a debt collector may use his business name if such name does not indicate that he is in the debt collection business." CA sent me a fax (paid for deletion letter) on 16 February. The TL is still on my reports and I'm pissed. On their fax, it clearly states that they are a collection agency. Since they want to dick around with not removing the TL, I thought maybe I could get them on something else. The TL is in dispute with EXP and TU. TU has to reply by 29 March. If they verify, I'll get them on that too. Are my assumptions correct?
-GET THEM? -I think you may be confusing a few different issues. -The fax appears to be in response to some communication you had with them?? If it was a response, then "3rd party discloure" etc does not really come into play here. You cant ask a debt collector to fax you something, then complain cause it indicates its from a debt collector -The bigger issue here is WHO is reporting the tradeline incorrectly? NOT THAT IT MATTERS -Sending a dispute letter DISPUTING the STATUS of the debt should help clarify the WHO. Or incriminate them both -Although the collection agency DOES NOT have to (by FCRA) delete the entry after payment, BUT if they entered into a contract (and it sounds written) with you to delete the entry, they need to uphold it and not "breach" the contract -BUT, the credit reporting agency, when presented "overwhelming" evidence to the contrary, CAN (and some say MUST) correct the info REGARDLESS of what the collection agency says. DO THEY DO IT?? HARDLY -When you settled with the collection agency (for deletion) they MOST LIKELY entered into their computers something along the lines of: "DBT AGRD TO PAY DEBT. SNT PYMT LTR. REQ TL DEL. SNT TO (whatever dept does CRA updating)" -So if you, or the reporting agency contacts them, they will say "yeah, its (consumer's name) debt. It WAS a collection. NOW its paid collection. And bingo you got a "paid collection" on your report. -Problem is the reporting agency has a copy of the collection agencies letter stating the "full story." Seems like an easy win in court PS- DONT BOTHER WITH AN "ITS" LETTER.
So, you're saying I should wait and see if it comes off with the dispute. If not, then go ahead and file suit for breach of contract, correct??
Wait untill the entry is concidered "obsolete" on its own. Another 180 days from the "7 year mark" THEN send a DISPUTE to the collection agency disputing the debt as "obsolete" -Reason being, if you dispute it now as obsolete because it was re-aged, "technically", IT IS NOT obsolete. Yes they may fix the re-age problem, which they are not responsible for unless they KNOW it is wrong, and the entry is still on there -BUT, if you wait until it actually IS obsolete, whatever their response is, OTHER THAN DELETION, can be a cause of action.
