Prior to discovering CN, Lady put in numerous phone calls seeking help. Always to get promises that someone will "look into it" only to have her orchastrations ignored. She did file one letter, (non CRRR) which of course they have no record of receiving. Letters to the CRA's always came back verified. This case goes way beyond laziness on the OC's part. It's a deliberate attempt to "switch" names of responsible party and attempt to collect. This will be a major case. BTW Lady, you're very welcome.
ok fave Butch growling dude: I was just making sure. Let's get something in writing for Lady so she can slam dunk their slimey butts then, or record phone calls with transcript. Is that allowed where you are Lady? You have copies of the CR's showing charge-off from AU to individual, yes? Lady, we are referring to the same case, Nelson v Chase Manhattan, and oh yeah, it has concluded. Mr. Nelson is VERY happy as are all of us with his paving the way, FCRA providing a cause of action for individuals, clarity ruling. Sassy
Thanx gang, Just to clarify, Lady's case is in the hands of a capable FDCPA & FCRA atty. and is headed straight for Federal District Court. We needn't worry too much about her. ~
Very cool, fave Butch growling dude and Lady! Can you say then what they are hanging their hats on so we know what to look for? The verbal stuff, though I don't doubt it one bit, doesn't seem strong enough for me, especially when dealing with liars that you know will lie under oath as well. Sassy EDIT: I'm curious about this in particular from an earlier Butch post: ""slips" account owners (BF's) name off the account and "slips" Lady in as contractually responsible." I'm thinking that slipping names in/out of consumer reports, no matter what they are saying, doesn't create or amend a contract.
