I called an attorney that I was refereed to for that nasty collection of my husbands that does not belong to him. He is interested in that case but seems MUCH more happy to deal with TU for refusing to investigate inquiries. I don't pay him if I do not get paid so that is good. Should I mess with it is the question? He recently (last week) got a client 95,000 for a collection that was not hers that delayed the financing of funeral arrangements for her husband. The kicker? The collection was 18.00. Now I know that I would NEVER get that, but it kind of bothered me that he ignored the real issue that I called him for stating that was a very small issue.
I'm sure the lawyer is thinking if he can get TU bent over enough on the inquries, that when it is time to settle they'll be happy to delete the collection in the process.
I assume you want the problem solved - the nasty collection removed. The attorney is telling you the best way to get to that result. I really would not care how the attorney resolves the problem, as long as it is resolved. Although personally, I would want to go after the CA. But, having gone through the same thing as you, my opinion is to go with the attorney's opinion.
That's because lawyers generally only want to take such cases if they can collect big judgments, and TU is "big game". You should read the stuff that's gone on with cases and regarding the search for an attorney at Creditcourt. http://forum.creditcourt.com/cgi-bin/discus/discus.pl Mommy2cats
