Discussion in 'Credit Talk' started by Beth, Jun 13, 2000.

  1. Beth

    Beth Guest

    I have a judgement on my credit report that Experian has deleted but the other credit reporting agencies won't.

    I've tried to get a hold of the company that filed the suit and have not been able to do so. I can't even find any trace of them in the phone book, internet, & I had my sister go to their old buildings and they are no longer there! The acct is nearly 7 years old & I think they are out of business, but according to Trans Union & Equifax, someone verified this was mine.

    Any advice what I shld do?

  2. Steven Z

    Steven Z Guest

    First things first, having "verified" it Experian must prove you with either the phone number or address, or both, where they did the verification.

    Now it may turn out that regardless of your unfruitable attempts in locating them, their may be any number of good reasons for your lack of success, they have simply moved, changed their name, merged with another company, got bought out or various others.

    BUT, if it turns out that the contact verification info you are given is BOGUS, then you'll just be another victim of a company notorious for lying about verifications (Experian is the worst of the three).

    To give you some background here's the url's from a recent thread between myself and J. Edgar on this same topic


    Beth, I truly believe this is another case of veriLYING on Experian's part and if you discover this is so I feel you will be in the driver's seat as far as your future dealings with Experian are concerned if you play your cards right.
  3. Steven Z

    Steven Z Guest

    RE: Correction!

    Just noticed my MISTAKE, in your case Experian actually did delete while the other two didn't.

    Well my advice still stands though with two of the CRA's verifiying it there stands a greater chance that they were able contact the company in question.

    Furthermore, as a judgement while it may be purged after 7 years, it also if not paid can be extended indefinately, otherwise it should remain 7 years from the time of payment.
  4. Mo

    Mo Guest

    In addition to Steven Z's information, there is another piece of this puzzle:

    Whether the company who sued you is around, is immaterial, if I have interpreted your situation correctly. A *judgement* is a public record that is considered and logged, by the CRA's, completely separately from the original debt. The verification here is that a *public record* exists in your hall of records, court records, etc. Even if, as it seems in your case, the comapny has vanished, the public record will remain there. The reason being is that the court placed it there, not the company. So it is the court that is verifying its existence.

    Now the problem is this: the CRA's are willy-nilly about public-record verification:

    1) Sometimes, such records can be directly checked by a CRA.

    2)sometimes they get info submitted to them directly in electronic form from the recorder. This usually happens in a "sophisticated" county operation, but is less likely in small/rural/not technologically hep jurisdictions.

    3) Sometimes, the CRA's rely on 3rd party businesses that do all this stuff for them. In such a case, the CRA "verifies" with the 3rd party, who then "verifies" the court records.

    As Steven says, though, it's usually veriLYING. It's frustrating as hell to have a CRA give you a contact number they say they used for verifications that is no longer in service.

    Additionally, while Steven says, correctly, that judgements can usually be re-newed, you are surely "in the clear" on this. I presume you've heard nothing from the company in 7 years or so, and you can't find them. Chances are they are not around to do any re-newing. On top of that, since you state it is 7 years old, wait for it to fall off, or just dispute it at 7 years to have it removed as the FCRA mandates.

    Now, one thing I THINK, but am not sure of is that even IF the judgement were to be RE-NEWED, I don't believe it can go back on your report after it comes off. My interpretation is that the renewal is ONLY the Statute of Limitations which means that, once again, the collection can be legally enforceable. I believe that state laws are the governing factor in such a case, not the FCRA.
  5. Beth

    Beth Guest

    Thank you for all the info! I will write to Equifax and Trans Union to get the info they used to verify this acct.

Share This Page