I ran my credit today in order to refinance and found two collections. LVNV and Arrow Financial. My average credit score is 659 despite these two collections. It appears that both of these collection companies acquired my account after being paid off. As part of a refinance back in July 2002, my mortgagor required that they pay these off at closing and issued seprate checks to the original creditors (Gulf State / OSI and First Premier). I asked for copies of the checks from the mortgaor and have obtained them and they are dated August 2002. I am still waiting on copies of the backs which I am told will take two weeks. Today, I called to find out when the two collection companies acquired the accounts. LVNV acquired it in October 2002 from Providian aka Gulfstate OSI and. Arrow Financial (from First Premier) December 3, 2002. Since the checks were issued and subsequently the accounts purchased, they have bumped up the amounts. The LVNV account which was paid off for 774 to Gulfstate is now wanting $1119 and the other to First Premier which was $393 is wanting $752.00. I told the lady from Arrow that my mortgage company issued the checks as a requirement for closing. The lady from Arrow said that the checks probably weren't cashed because of the pending sale of the accounts, and she began arguing with me that even if that were the case, it was my responsiblity to check and verify they cleared. So how is it my problem that a check was issued to the proper creditor and never cashed - and that's even if it were not cashed. I'm confident that it has been cashed, but I'm still waiting for proof. Can someone help with advise about what I shoudl do with these two accounts.
When you get copies of the back of the checks, it will show if they were cashed. Does it surprise you that they already have an argument ready for you to pay them on a debt you already paid? Since these were required to be paid off in 2002, when did they originally go delinquent? Are they past SOL in your state?
For an interesting overview of tactics and likely legitimacy of alleged debt, see ripoffreport.com, search on "Arrow Financial". A similar search on "LVNV" is rather skimpy. It appears they reorganized from a company called "Sherman Acquisition", which you will find many reports on.
This is also interesting, in that it references repeated attempts to collect debt from a party that did not owe it: http://forum.creditcourt.com/cgi-bin/discus/show.pl?tpc=15&post=649 they now appear to be largely owned by Sallie Mae: http://www2.salliemae.com/news/newsreleases/040917.htm
Updated information: I went back to my old credit reports that I keep copies of to get more information. The LVNV (Sherman Acquisition) which was then showing under Gulfstate Credit / Providian shows the last activity date of 12/1999. My mortgage company either attempted to pay or was successful in August of 2002. It was then sold to LVNV. The Arrow Financial (First Premier) shows last activity date of 04/2000. My mortgage company either attempted to pay and/or was successful in August of 2002. It was thereafter sold to Arrow. So, it would appear that all of these debts (which were credit cards) are over four years old. LVNV is NOW reporting that the date opened 10/2002 and Arrow as 12/2002 for the date opened. These match the dates that these collection agents purchased the accounts. So what do I do now? Do I even need to wait two weeks to get the copies of the backs of the checks in order to begin teh argument that they were paid? Or can I just start attacking them as being too old.
First verify that your state's SOL on this type of debt is past. Check your last payment dates on the accounts to the original creditors, and also verify the original dates of delinquency as reported to the CRAs by the earlier creditors/CAs, to see if the new CAs are reporting the same original date of delinquency. You can call the CRAs to get the reported original dates of delinquency as reported for each TL by the original creditor, and each of the CAs, or JDBs. Ask them when each TL is due to fall off. If SOL is 4 years (check this for your state), you would have a defense if they sued, but they could still report the TL for 7 years. If you have already paid it, you still want it off. Your strongest defense, both to block collection, and to get their TLs off your reports, is that these were already paid before they bought the accounts. They have no business collecting on, or even posting any TLs on your reports, for accounts that the sellers had no right to sell to them because they had already been paid. Get those check copies. Don't argue or negotiate until you know what your best case is.
I now just pulled a 3 in 1 report, which stills shows at least one of the original creditors reporting that it was sold, and the sold to reporting it. I also have a Sears being reported by only one credit agency...although it was fully paid off in 1999 they are still reporting a settlement, although in their letter they advised t hey would report that it would be reported as closed satisfactorily.
If the Sears account was paid off in 1999, what was its original date of delinquency? It should be close to falling off after 7 years, but it is worth checking to make sure it does.
TL = credit report Trade Line (i.e. account entry from an OC (original creditor) or CA (collection agency).
Just from reading your post, I'm overwhelmed. I'm new to this, and even from reading I am having a hard time keeping up with what is being said through acronyms. What is SOL? What is TL? What is JDB?
Ok, my lawyer says 4years and they drop off. Is that the SOL you were talking about? But Equifax lady said they can list for seven???? Equifax shows the following information: Arrow Financial Services: (First Premier) Date of last activity Feb 2000 (this is their date of deliquency per Tammy) Sherman Acquisition (LVNV): (Providian) Date of last activity December 1999 Experian: Had to send email - no other way, waiting on response. Trans Union shows the following information: Arrow Financial: (First Premier) Date of original deliquency Feb 2000. So, what would be my next steps?
And I might be getting ahead of myself, but one of the CA's are not registered with my state.... Sherman Acquisition / LVNV. So, I might be able to do something with them.
SOL refers to Statute of Limitations. For different types of debts or claims different states have limits on how long a creditor can wait before filing suit. If they wait too long, you can raise as a defense that it is past the SOL, and the case will generally be thrown out. Check with your attorney on what types of debts these are, and what your state's SOL is. Under FDCPA, it could be a violation for the CA to threaten to sue when they knew a debt was past SOL, since they would be threatening an action they could not legally do, or were not intending to do. The seven year reporting period is a separate requirement under FCRA, which prohibits the CRAs from reporting TLs more than 7 years after the original date of delinquency. That 7 year point is the date after which the negative entry should fall off. Be aware that the date reported under DOLA (Date of Last Activity) is not necessarily the same as the date of original delinquency. The date of original delinquency, and the corresponding fall-off date, are what matter. The OC, or CA, or whoever is posting the negative entry must inform the CRA of this original date of delinquency within 90 days of posting the TL to your report. If you have any way to verify, try to check whether the dates the CRAs are indicating are correct, based on your statements or payment records. Some CAs and JDBs have been known to "re-age" entries by reporting recent dates as the original date of delinquency, to illegally keep the entries on reports longer and pressure to collect. It appears from your information that you have a little over a year before the negative entries drop off your reports. Your strongest hand is still if you can show the debts were paid, and they are attempting to collect on an already paid debt.
JDB = Junk Debt Buyer, vs. CA = Collection Agency. Some companies collect on debts assigned by, but still owned by the original creditor. Others buy the debt, either from the original creditor, or from another JDB. Many problems can occur with debt that is transferred multiple times, generally without anything other that electronic information. It may cost extra to obtain access to the original records of the original creditor, if they are even available at all.
If it turns out you paid it to the last owner of the debt, who took the money but sold it anyway, and they were attempting to collect on it, file another FTC and AG complaint for fraudulent sale of a paid debt, fraudulent continued collection on a paid debt, illegally pulling your reports without permissible purpose to engage in illegal collection activity, and misrepresenting the legal status of a debt. Let them argue it was a mistake, in which case they better undo it. Probably the most egregious claims in FTC actions against CAs have involved systematic collection activity against people who don't owe anything, while refusing to accept or adequately investigate disputes.
If debt was paid, first CA had no right to sell it. Second CA obtained no rights to collect what first CA had no right to sell, and therefore had no right to pull your reports. In this game of poker, with the consumer having a cancelled check showing payment, and continued collection activity on a debt already paid, what would you do in their position? There is no up-side to litigation. Removal is cheap.
