I have a paid/zero balance account that is showing up on all 3 of my reports. Its the last major thing on my reports and I'd really like help getting it off. For this account, the OC is pretty much the CA. It was for a corp credit card that was charged off about 3 yrs ago. I paid them the full balance, but didn't negotiate for a positive notation on the credit reports. I sent them a validation letter about 45 days ago. They responded by sending me copies of every credit card statement they sent me, and noted exactly where I missed payments. They also sent copies of the checks I sent them for payment after the account was marked as charged off. My questions are: 1) Does this satisfy the requirements for validation of the debt? 2) If it doesn't, what should my next step be? If it does, what do you suggest? Thanks!!
Anyone? I thought that they had to send me a copy of a signed contract as validation. (And not just copies of statements). Does an OC have to abide by the same validation rules as a CA does?
1) I want to see the actual credit contract/application. I may have paid this debt, but is it really mine... 2)I would suggest looking for any/all possible inaccuracies in the trade line that's being reported. What you want to do at this point, is catch them on something and hang it over their head. But for the most part, my opinion is to let it ride out. BTW, look at the dated in the tradeline "very" closely. There could be something inaccurate there. Look at the statements very closely. Also, as I understand, this was all done with a CA...the OC is out of the picture.
Thanks. I decided to send them a modified nutcase3. Added a few references to Spears v Brennan to prove that what they sent me doesn't really constitute validation. Its a bank, but I suspect they won't have a copy of the contract after 4 yrs. Maybe they'll delete just to get me out of their hair
The problem here is that they are an oc, and thus are not obligated to validate per the FDCPA, unless you are in Cal. They must prove the amount of debt per the FCRA, but I don't believe they need to send you copies of contracts etc.
lkh, my boyfriend has 2 charge offs listed on his report from cell phone companies (he talks too much) the oc is listed on the report but he received dunning letters from an outside collection agency for 1 of them... he said that the ca said that they cant' report by law... is this sort of the same situation? also, to the poster: since this was a corporate credit card..did you even sign a contract with the credit card company? i signed a paper to my employer for mine... just a thought...
LKH: Thanks. I did a bit more research after I wrote the letter, and saw that an OC isn't bound by FDCPA...just as you said I'm going to poke around a bit more, but it seems when dealing with an OC paid account, you're pretty much sunk unless they somehow got the amount wrong. They MIGHT have the high balance wrong on the tradeline (they have it marked as $0), but that seems like a stretch to pursue. Can anyone suggest any other courses of action to pursue with the OC? The good news is that all 3 CRAs never responded to my procedural requests, so I may be able to get deletes directly with the CRAs.
taken from credit boards: http://www.creditboards.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1925 *You do NOT have legal right to validation under the FDCPA when dealing with an original creditor. They may supply validation at their option, but are not required to do so. However, you do have the right under the FCRA to dispute directly with an original creditor any information reported that you feel is incorrect. This can be found in section 623. Once they have received your dispute, they must investigate the reported info and, they must also report the acct as disputed with the cra's. If you demand validation from a creditor who is already listing a derogatory tradeline on your credit report, they are required to note that account as "disputed by consumer" ( or similar language). They may NOT place a new listing, or verify a current listing with the CRA until they have provided you with validation.
Re: Re: Partial Validation question with OC Isn't there a clause in the FCRA that states information supplied the CRA must be verifiable by the source as to it validity.
Re: Re: Partial Validation question with OC Interesting. I did not know that if an account is in dispute, the CA couldn't verify an account with the CRA until they provide you with validation. I don't suppose you know which statute that rule is from? Hmmm...that makes things even more interesting. Thank you very much kbean!!
Re: Re: Partial Validation question with OC well it's tricky... here is a thread where Grendel defends his pr letter... it deals with this issue sort of indirectly.. http://www.creditboards.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=5713&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0 to be honest... i have interperted the statutues to mean that if a CA can't validate...then they can't collect and reporting is a form of collection.. also a violation would be: if you send a request for d/v and then dispute with the cra when you get the green card back... IF THE CA verifies with the CRA before they note the account in dispute (because they know you are disputing via the d/v letter) i can't say for sure that an OC HAS to do anything...i think this is where people get confused and think that a CA OR OC HAS to validate to them before they verify...which I dont' think is true...
