Just checked my PG reports and I have a hard inq on EXP from palisades. I had sent a validation request to Palisades a few weeks ago. Then I disputed on EQ and TU. It wasn't even being reported on EXP. My guess is they received verification request from the two CRAs and were wondering why they didn't from EXP? From my readings on this board I believe I already have PAL on 1 violation (pulling the hard inq). Tell me if I have the right mindset for the upcoming battle. Another violation will be after the 30 days and they still haven't marked the TL as "in dispute" on the 2 CRA's (1 or 2 violations? 1 per CRA?) They will give me another violation for my file when they verify with the CRAs before verifiying with me (2 more violations 1 per CRA?). They might even give me more violations if they mess around anymore with my EXP report! At first tonight when I saw the Hard Inq. I was pissed. Then the more I thought about it I am happy to recieve the violation cause I now know what I have to do and thats SUE THEM, SUE THEM ALL! These violations will really add up for the CA but I wonder how many I can get on the CRA at the same time and which path would be better to a clean record. Sue the CA or CRA or both?
They do need to report the acct as disputed, but I'm not aware of a 30 day requirement. We usually say 30 days is a reasonable amount of time to comply with most aspects of the FDCPA and FCRA. At this point, what do you think you can sue the cra for?
I got the 30 days from the timeline for a CRA to investigate the disopute I have with them. If the CA validates with them and not me in that time frame. I realise I am assuming alot and jumping ahead a few steps. I just want to be ready when it happens. I don't think I have any grounds for a CRA suit as of now. I am thinking about the gameplan. I think I would first provide proof of lack of response from the CA and then ITS to CRA first. Just wondering and trying to get a grip on which road to focus on?
I hope you have copies (printouts) of your credit report pre hard inquiry as well as the post inquiry as proof. Yes, I would say that putting a hard inquiry on ones credit report is definitly an act of collecting the debt, which they are not allowed to do when you've questioned the validity of the debt. $1,000 Then there's not noting the debt as being in dispute to the CRA's when they sent request to validate. $2,000 Then there would be validating to the CRA when no such proof exists, and not validating back to you. $2,000 If the "original debt" isn't too large, and or is past the SOL I say after a month, when the CRA's have written back "Account Verified, information stays" just file against them, immediately start suit, don't give them a chance to get any of their ducks in a line to be able to defend a lawsuit. Then send them an offer to settle . . . $1,000 and delete their tradelines from each of the 2 CRA's they're on. I suggest this low of an offer to settle, thinking that with a filed lawsuit in hand for $5,000 they very likely would agree and settle quickly. It will cost them almost $1,000 to hire a lawyer to defend the case, and then they have the risk of loosing. If they refuse your offer to settle, take em to the cleaners! If you get any letter from them after you've filed suit, I say make sure you DON'T open it while alone, have a witness watch you open it and see it's contents. If they send "proof" of your debt after you've filed suit, they still violated the law by verifing to the CRA's but not to you. This way if it does go to court you can insist that even if they proove the debt is yours, they've still violated the FDCPA and are still liable. Just a thought. ChrisB IMPORTANT: I am not a lawyer, and any advice given in the above post is just my humble opinion. I claim no liability or responsability for any use or misuse of the information.
Palisades is part of OSI who just filed chapter 11. You will have to wait until they emerge from chapter 11. Otherwise, any legal proceedings will be halted by the automatic stay of the BK.
I will be pulling all 3 tonight. Thanks for backin me up on this violation. I have yet to pull individual reports since I have sent val letter. One question on this proof how do I know if it was the CA or the CRA who marked the TL as "in dispute"? Ahh, now its startin to add up! This is where it gets tricky, debt is listed as around $2400. and is within SOL (at 6.5yrs, SOL is 10). I originally called the OC on this (once I found it on my report) and asked if I could pay them. They said it had been sold. Then I found this site and read all about validation and feel confident that I can at least get myself some leverage to negotiate settlement hell I'd pay it all If they would delete all TL (including those from the OC) . But I am trying to get leverage to make that happen. Thanks for the detailed reply I am gratefull, DX
Thanks to you too boyo. I cant help it the tears are startin to flow for OSI ... LOL! I have heard that they are all owned by each other how much you wanna bet that before I'm done they flip this debt to one of their other aka's? DX
Update: I noticed in my daily PG pull that the PAL Accct in now marked as in disppute on my EQ. How does one find out if this is due to my dispute with EQ or due to my request for validation with PAL? Also just recieved a pink slip in my mail box, for Cert Mail ( on way to work tonight) I have to wait till tomorrow to find out but I would bet it is some form of comm. from PAL. Any thoughts? , DX
