Well, this one should be ALOT of fun! I found GE CAP reporting on my CR that an account was a paid settled charge off account when I have a letter written over a year and a half ago that the account would be upgraded to paid as agreed once paid. Moreover they did not do it once I paid and I complained......prompting their apology letter and assurances the matter was corrected in June 2002. Well, guess what has showed up for nearly a year now?????? You got it!!!! So today my ITS letter goes to GE CAP President David Nissen. There may be other violations too.This is long but y'all take a look and give feedback if you wish: December 10, 2003 GE Capital Corporation ATTN: David Nissen 1600 Summer St. Stamford, CT 06927 **CMRRR# ** Dear Mr. Nissen/GE Capital: It has come to my attention that your company have placed a derogatory remark on my credit bureau files pursuant to my having paid you what you claimed that I owed you and Finger Furniture. When I paid you, I relied upon the belief that you would do the honorable thing and remove your nasty and derogatory comments from my credit bureau files which you not only failed to do but actually changed my listing to paid charge-off which is a far worse rating in the eyes of any potential future creditors. In fact, I have a letter from your offices stating that the account would be upgraded and reported as paid as agreed. I also have an apology letter from your company prompted by my complaint that the proper notation was not made by GE Capital. In doing so, you obviously failed to realize that the Doctrine of Estoppel directly applies to this type of situation and is cause and more than sufficient grounds for my pending lawsuit against you for punitive damages in whatever amount a jury might deem appropriate for your violation of the estoppel doctrine of law. Here is what the Doctrine of Estoppel is and how it applies to your violations of it. In order for the doctrine of estoppel to apply, the party of the first part (you, the collector) must make some statement or engage in some conduct upon which I have relied and acted upon which later proved to be to my detriment or prejudice. In your communications with me you told me that you would update my credit reports as soon as I had paid the debt to you. Quite naturally, I assumed and relied upon your statement to that effect to mean that you would mark the account as "paid as agreed" or even quite possibly remove it entirely. I am quite confident that both you and a court of law will agree that such is a perfectly reasonable assumption for an average debtor to make. And so upon that assumption I agreed to pay the debt and in fact did so on June 5, 2002 whereupon you actually worsened my credit bureau scores and that was most definitely to my detriment and prejudice. While you may think that I have no right of private action due to the way FCRA is worded, let me assure you that such beliefs are quite ungrounded and false. That point has been vividly pointed out by the ruling of the U.S. 9th Cir. Ct. of Appeals in the case of Nelson v Chase, March 3, 2002. in which the court pointed out that Section 1681s-2(b) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act creates a cause of action for a consumer against a furnisher of erroneous credit information. But my pending suit against you may not be about FDCPA nor FCRA but about how you have damaged me after I acted in good faith in dealing with you. In reality, you actually owe me a second apology letter as well as checks for each violation of FDCPA, FCRA & Texas Finance Code which in this case would be for every month this has been reported erroneously (18). Eighteen months of reckless reporting equals eighteen violations times $1000 apiece times each act (3). This amount may be as low as $18000 - $54000 or even higher. That is just the amount allowed by law, not to speak of what a jury might add for defamation of character and the damage your company has done to me. At this time I would still be willing to offer GE Capital the opportunity to completely settle this matter with me in exchange for full deletion of this account from all credit reporting agencies, along with GE Capitalâ??s check payable to me in the amount of $9,000 (half the amount of the minimum subject penalties) and a copy of your UDF which you transmitted to the credit bureaus demanding it's removal in exchange for me not retaining an attorney and me dropping any and all legal claims against GE Capital and itâ??s associates. I am very well aware that you have a contractural agreement with the credit bureaus which covers this problem and supposedly prevents you from compliance with my demands but a contract which is in violation of the law is null and void and of no force and effect whatever and therefore cannot be enforced either by you or upon you. Your so-called contract with the credit bureaus will not protect you for your willful violation of my rights which are protected by the Doctrine of Estoppel. I am sure you would consider this settlement fair as we can be sure that the repercussions from a lawsuit, attorney fees, repeated violations, statutory and possible punitive damages and the potential of a class action lawsuit would most likely be far greater than the amount I am willing to settle with now. Please review your file carefully and if you agree to the above, please acknowledge with your letter of confirmation and return a copy to me along with a check in the aforementioned amount and your release for my inspection by no later than January 3, 2004. Furthermore it is expressly agreed that I will not cash the check until a mutually agreeable release has been secured by GE Capital. Upon receipt of these items, I will promptly review any necessary releases you may require to conclude this matter. Sincerely, TallSmith
If you have their agreement in writing as condition for payment, followed by their apology and agreement to correct, you have a stronger case based on breach of contract than on "estopel". Focus on that and keep your letter shorter. They didn't do what they agreed to do, they have admitted they made a mistake, their actions are damaging you, and they still haven't corrected it.
I agree. Breach is more cut and dried, more judges understand it. But don't lay out your case for them, just that they agreed to do this and have breached that agreement, if not corrected promptly you will sue.
Am I wrong for expecting some type of settlement check from GE CAP on this since it is such a clear breach of our contract? Estoppel is pretty common for lawyers and judges to understand. I've got another one of these where the agreement was VERY vague on my DW. We were buying a house and some old lease on an apartment turned up at closing so I paid $225 to make it go away in exchange for their letter to her saying that they would "upgrade her credit rating". Pre-payment it was defintiely listed as a charge off and now it's listed as a paid charge off. Any ideas? These guys are so easy to catch..........
