Please comment. Am I screwed bc I sent the original bill in my package? CRA RE: Palisades Collections I/AT&T long distance services Dear Sir/Madame: This letter is in response to a notation on my credit report regarding Palisades Collections I/AT&T long distance services (â??AT&Tâ?). I am requesting that the item be deleted to correct the information. The following is a brief account of the events leading up to this fraudulent claim on the part of AT&T and now Palisades as they have apparently purchased the account. In February of 2000, in anticipation of some international calling I was going to make, I signed up for an international calling plan. The plan was never placed on my account resulting in the excessive alleged debt referenced above and which appear under Tab 1 of the attached materials. On the 4th of May, 2000 I spoke with both Tom of AT&T (located at Domestic Customer Service Killean, TX) and his manager and was told that the bill would be â??re-ratedâ? to reflect the international calling plan that should have been in place at the time of the calls. In accordance with my conversation I sent a fax, attached hereto (as Tab 2) to AT&Tâ??s 0300 Correspondence Team. No re-rate was ever made. On the 11th of May, 2000 I requested a manager call back and was told I had reached the incorrect division. On the 15th of May, 2000 I spoke with Darlene in AT&Tâ??s Jacksonville office and was told I would receive a call back. Again, I never received a call back. Subsequently, I had conversations with 2 people in AT&Tâ??s Credit Department: · Jerry (Tucson AZ) in International Customer Service who told me he couldnâ??t process the re-rate because it would be denied · Eddie (Tucson AZ) who told me I would receive a call back in 2 to 3 business days and never did. Finally after filing a complaint with the Better Business Bureau (Tab 3) I received letters (Tab 4) from AT&T stating that they â??re-ratedâ?? the bill partially. The re-rate applied to the month after the international calls were made. No international calls at all were made during their partial â??re-rateâ?? period. The re-rated bill for the following month appears under Tab 5. Next comes the lovely correspondence with four different â??debt collection agenciesâ??. All four were told that the debt was disputed and the circumstances surrounding it. All four failed to make notation of it when they reported the debt to you and the other credit reporting agencies, a clear violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. I have attached the correspondence and the fedex tickets for all four agencies as follows: · June 6, 2000 OSI Collection Services, Inc. Tab 6 · August 16, 2000 GC Services Tab 7 · March 7, 2001 Risk Management Alternatives, Inc. Tab 8 · April 1, 2003 Palisades Acquisition I, LLC Tab 9 For all of the above reasons, the reporting of this item is inaccurate, unliquidated and disputed. The Item appears on the credit report located under Tab 10. Please investigate this dispute and delete this notation from my credit report. After the entry is removed, I request that you make notification according to 611(d) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. My information appears below:
Resquested it from all four. Never received any, so to go back to the question, could the bill be construed as me validating it myself as the CRA must send the info I sent them to the latest CA.
Re: Re: Newbee help with dispute IMO, no. Tab 5 (the re-rated bill) proved that their allegation is wrong. You confirmed that they are contacting the correct consumer about the account, but their allegation is wrong. Nothing wrong with that to me. I would send them a C&D. If they sued (they would be real stupid to), with your extensive papertrail you would nail them to the wall real easy.
Re: Re: Newbee help with dispute The intersting thing is that the initial CA was OSI, I disputed with them, they went away and now it is owned by Palisades (part of OSI??) with RCS as the CA. Is it a violation now for the Palisades/OSI company to come back at me again 2 years and 3 CAs later as the new "owner"?
Re: Re: Newbee help with dispute Resquested validation from all four. Never received any, nicotrol2 =============== Did you really want any? One thing to keep in mind when working on credit is Disputing is not explaining! THE END ** *** ** LB 59
Re: Re: Re: Newbee help with dispute LB, I actually disputed, explained and requested validation from all four. Is your point that I shouldn't have "explained" anything to the CRA, CAs or both?
Re: Re: Re: Newbee help with dispute That was LB's point. If you haven't mailed that letter to Palisades, I would look in the sample letter forum at the letter for subsequent CA strategy. As part of that letter, you send a copy to the OC warning them they could/will be held liable for the actions of their collectors. You might send them (the OC) the documentation.
LB, I actually disputed, explained and requested validation from all four. Is your point that I shouldn't have "explained" anything to the CRA, CAs or both? nicotrol2 00000000000000000000000000 Rite on. THE END ** *** ** LB 59
If either of you could be a little less terse, I would be very appreciative as you all seem to have a lot of experience with this sort of situation. Briefly: 1. Have I put myself in a worse situation, ie. did actually explaining it hurt my chances of deletion? (and BTW, it would be a real shame if one could get steamrolled by a telephone company without any recourse of an explanation into paying an egregious bill solely due to the fact that they could screw up your credit record) 2. If yes, what can I do to ameliorate the situation? Additional data points: sent a second letter to CA requesting deletion and CRAs received package on May 7th.
