Opening a can of worms?!?

Discussion in 'Credit Talk' started by unruly, Sep 24, 2003.

  1. unruly

    unruly Well-Known Member

    Hey gang ... long time no talk!

    I spent the majority of last year clearing up my reports which ended in two successful lawsuits against the CRAs. Woo hoo! Now I am enjoying the use of credit and cherish it as my greatest asset.

    Today, I pulled my reports as I now do monthly and I find the following:

    EFX - New Account listed in "Other Accounts" and "Accounts Past Due" Sections.
    CITYFIN SBCOHIO Past Due $631
    Customer unable to locate consumer.

    EXP - New Account listed in "Potentially Negative"
    Creditor cannot locate individual

    TU - No new accounts listed but new inquiry from ASSET ACCEPTANCE LLC Permissible Purpose = COLLECTION

    I've never received any mail or a phone call from a collection agency or anyone else. Since they pulled my CR, there is no reason they cannot locate me?

    I think this is from an old Ameritech collection from 3 or 4 years ago that if I remember correctly I got deleted last year, only it was thru a different CA.

    I am questioning now on how to proceed...

    1. Should I send a validation letter demanding proof of claim? Their listing on EFX and EXP does not show as COLLECTION, yet.

    2. Should I send a nastygram to ASSET ACCEPTANCE LLC demanding proof of their alleged permissible purpose along with $1,000? (According to an internet search, this ASSET ACCEPTANCE LLC and CITYFIN and CFC FINANCIAL are the same outfit with different P.O. Box numbers).

    3. Or should I send the CA a general letter stating they are reporting erroneous information on my CR and there is no reason for them to not be able to locate me?

    I am kinda pissed at the moment and need to think this through before I fire off a really mean letter.

    Any one else experience this sort of thing and bring about a successful resolve?

  2. jam237

    jam237 Well-Known Member

    Well, if you hadn't heard from them before, I usually demand validation, emphasizing that they have never contacted me to provide me with my rights in accordance with federal law, and that I am exercising all of my rights to dispute the alleged account in full.

    SBC Ohio looks to be a phone bill, so the question is would the original account be in an out-of-SOL status, if its within SOL you may have to tame the correspondence down a bit to keep them from getting mad, sending off a quick validation response, and then quick flipping the account into a hearing as soon as they send the quick validation response.

    I normally request the validation to include, application, all invoices, and statements, etc; and tar the dispute with "Notice to agent is notice to principal. Notice to principal is notice to agent. Applies to all successors and assigns." to help make sure that the dispute is perm (even if they sell, or transfer to anyone -- the applies to successors and assigns portion -- even the OC -- the notice to agent is notice to principal portion).

    Again, you can use the fact that they've never contacted you to your benefit, play dumb, and act as if its a credit card, and demand the credit application, invoices, and receipts for all purchases, they have never let you know that the account is for an alleged phone bill.

    I also bring up Wollman in the dispute as well to exercise my rights under the FDCPA that all validation comes not from what they have already, but directly from the alleged OC.

    As soon as you get the green card back from them, request that the CRAs dispute the entry. Be prepared for the CA to try to send out something to answer the validation request immediately, so that they can respond to the CRAs before the deadline.

    Here is a validation letter that I sent out after receiving a 'privacy notice' only from a CA...

    This is for account(s) that are past-SOL, so I had more space to politely vent as a furiated consumer who just received a privacy notice for a company that they have never heard of. :) you'ld just change the circumstances to "I just received a copy of my credit report which indicates that you received a copy of my credit report" -- don't make any references to the reports that they are showing a listing for; so that you can continue to play dumb as to what the alleged account is for.)

    Re: Notice received Saturday, August 23, 2003 dated 08/01/2003

    Monday, August 25, 2003

    I have never heard of your company, or any of your alleged subsidiaries, as identified on the notice.

    I have not received any statement of rights from your company, or alleged subsidiaries, including my rights to validation of the alleged account(s) allegedly owned by or assigned to your company or alleged subsidiaries. However, I am hereby exercising the right to request a complete and total validation of the alleged account(s) allegedly owned by or assigned to your company or alleged subsidiaries.

    I am hereby requesting complete historical documentation for validation of the alleged account(s) including, but not limited to:

    â?¢ A signed application.
    â?¢ All statements for the account(s) in question.
    â?¢ All receipts for the account(s) in question.

    Anything less than all of the information requested above will not be acceptable as a successful answer to the validation of debts request.

    Also please be advised, that in compliance with the FTCâ??s Wollman opinion, I am exercising my rights to ensure that all of the alleged documentation for the successful completion of this validation request, must not come from any information which your company or alleged subsidiaries, allegedly already has on file, but from the alleged original creditor(s) themselves in accordance with the Fair Debts Collection Practices Act.

    I am also requesting that your company and alleged subsidiaries immediately forward the name, and information for the alleged original creditor(s) for the alleged account(s) in question.

    Your company, and alleged subsidiaries are hereby advised to comply with federal law, and cease any and all collection activities on this account until an acceptable validation of debts response is received on all of the issues above-stated; and an adequate amount of time for review of the alleged documentation is allowed of not less than 30 days.

    Also, please be advised that I am also exercising my rights under Federal Law to ensure that the transfer or assigning of this account to any other company including the alleged original creditor(s) will not enable any action which is prohibited by the Fair Debts Collection Practices Act, including but not limited to the resumption of collection activities prohibited following the request for validation, before that complete and total validation is provided by your company, and alleged subsidiaries.

    This also serves as notice that all future correspondence and communications may only be made via mail to the address above.

    Notice to agent is notice to principal. Notice to principal is notice to agent. Applies to all successors and assigns.
  3. lbrown59

    lbrown59 Well-Known Member

    Is an Ohio Phone Co.

    Are you or were you ever in Ohio?
    Have you ever had their service?

    PS: Do you have any idea what these listing on the reports are for?

Share This Page