Need advice quickly...

Re: Additional info...

The clock starts ticking when the cause of action accrues. In simple terms, that is when they first had a loss. In my opinion, when you stopped paying is when they first had a loss. I would count from that date. You cannot count from the date of your last charge, because the CC company did not yet have a loss.

And, the date on the credit report is useless.

Assuming the SOL has expired, the obvious solution (assuming you want to pay it and have the negative removed) is to tell them the SOL has expired, that you will pay, but only if the negative is removed.

It goes without saying that both the CA and the creditor must agree in writing to removal of all negative references. They will tell you anything to get you to pay so don't agree verbally to anything. I got screwed when I did.

My opinion: Offer to pay only part of the debt if they will remove all negatives. I only say this because CA's are so dishonest and it does not seem right that they should collect in full. But, you have your own moral standards, so do what you think is right.

 

Re: Additional info...

Good point. I do not have an answer.

But, I have an idea that may work. Maybe someone else could give us some input. If the CC company sold the debt to the CA, and the CA is reporting it on the credit report, Can the original creditor still report it? I suspect the answer is yes, but as charged off, sold.

Another possibility is to make the deal with the CA, then challange any listing by the creditor, and hope they fail to verify.

Still thinking out loud (my lips are moving), are you sure anything is being reported by the original creditor?

And, why I am still thinking, again a question that I don't have an answer to, can the original creditor reage the debt if you pay off the CA? Or, will it still fall off your credit report after 7 years?

And, as long as I am rambling, I am sure the CA and the creditor have an ongoing relationship. Will the CA get the creditor to agree to a deletion in the interest of the long term relationship?

I know they will say they can't but they may.

I realize that I have raised more questions than I answered, but you have only one shot to do this right. Hopefully someone has some advice.

 

Re: Additional info...

Kirk,

Looks to me like this will be reported (to CRA's) based on date of last activity - everything important was prior to the 1997 law changes. If it is past the SOL in your state (I don't know) I would not pay it - I would start sending "the letters" to the CA - i.e. validation - "prove that I owe you this money", then cease communication - "go away and leave us alone."

If I understand these laws (I think I do, LOL) paying it will just start the 7 years again.

Someone suggested negoitating w/CA - that might work, but as suggested, get all deals in writing.

Hope this helps,

breeze

 

Re: Additional info...

All:
For the sake of clarification, the SOL begins to run at the time of default or last payment activity. Tom is correct, as the former is a prevailing industry standard. Whatever is reported as last date of activity should only be used as a general reference, and Iâ??d caution against relying too much on it.

Well the original creditor has a right to report the transfer, but afterwards there would no longer be a legitimate purpose for reporting â?? once the debt is sold. The question then becomes, what to do about the original creditor hit after the collection agent is taken care of? There isnâ??t a simple answer as many tactics could remove the hit, while others wouldnâ??t do much good. (BTW, Tom, not ALL collection agents are â??dishonest.â?)

If the collection agent is paid off or otherwise dealt with, the original creditor could not come back and re-age or report again â?? following itâ??s initial report of the sale. In other words, the original creditor hit would (or should) fall off the report after the 7-year run.

A â??long-term relationshipâ? doesnâ??t always exist between original creditor and acquisition creditor (CA). Even if it did thereâ??s very little incentive for the original creditor to bend-over-backwards, so to speak, to accommodate the acquisition creditor. Why should they, the prevailing mentality would likely be; the debt is sold (gone) so theyâ??re done with it.

You understand them ok, paying on the account would restart the clock. Sometimes even committing to pay will have the same affect, which is why negotiations must be done carefully.

 

Re: Additional info...

You mention that several tactics might work for dealing with the negative tradeline from the original creditor after the CA is taken care of. Can you suggest a couple. Thanks.

 

Re: Additional info...

Sure thing, presuming you understand what follows is based on the collection agentâ??s hit no longer being at issue (it having been removed or otherwise dealt with).

Naturally, disputing is the logical course but Iâ??d suggest doing so right around late November/mid-December. The reason being is that (generally) disputes are directed through collections, and right about this time of year most collection departments are rather busy. This increases a likelihood the original creditor wonâ??t respond in time, and the hit will be removed accordingly.

Secondly, if your first attempt fails, try again around February. Same reason, most collection departments are busy recouping from holiday delinquencies. Again, if they donâ??t respond the hit must go.

Another angle to consider is alleging the debt is paid, and demanding that the original creditor update itâ??s reporting accordingly. This is a hassle for original creditors because the general mindset of those working the dispute desk, is a want for the path of least resistance. Those working the dispute section are often over-burdened with work, and will have a natural focus on accounts still affecting the creditor. (Attention on sold accounts is a nuisance, and thatâ??s what youâ??ll want to become â?? a pain in the rump!)

Lastly. Be patient and persevere. As many will attest here success has only come to them by steady work, either on their own behalf or that of a professional service (Lex and Junum to name a couple more reputable ones). The thing is, hang in there! [;-)

 

Re: Additional info...

Anthony claims that not all collectors are dishonest. I disagree. At least I have never met an honest one nor have I ever spoken to someone who has. They are evil.

 

Re: Additional info...

No. This is "splitting" to the extreme. Anthony's right. There are some decent collection agents. They are hard to find, for sure, but they are there.

 

Re: Additional info...

Why thanks Marci, I appreciate the balance. Not that I thought Tom was attempting to be rude, or anything of the sort. I mean, as a former collections executive with many friends still actively in the biz; I can attest there are many â??honestâ? players available.

Makes little difference, however, because Tomâ??s thoughts are not unique. In fact they are more pervasive than accurate, something we at CAMTrex are depending on while developing the iBAC/CD project. So itâ??s a good thing Tom and others feel this way. [;-)

 

Re: Additional info...

If the account is sold to the CA, does that mean that the original creditor has no right to collect the debt?

I guess where I'm going with this is:
Could he still negotiate payment full or otherwise with the original creditor for deletion. Then tell the CA the debt is paid/settled to the orig creditor, go away and remove derog?