Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Credit Talk' started by lisamar378, Aug 5, 2003.
Barclaycard Ring™ Mastercard®
No annual fee, No balance transfer fees, No foreign transaction fees, Low interest!
CREDIT CARD WITH NO ANNUAL FEEBarclaycard Ring™ Mastercard®
Credit One Unsecured Visa®for Rebuilding Credit
Credit card for people with bad credit to rebuild credit!
BAD CREDIT CREDIT CARDCredit One Bank® Rebuild Credit
First Access VISA® Credit Card
Access to credit even with bad or limited credit! Reports to 3 major credit bureaus and accepted wherever you see the Visa® sign. Get application response in 60 seconds.
CREDIT CARD FOR BAD CREDITFirst Access VISA®
Green Dot primor® Visa®Classic Secured Credit Card
Credit lines available up to $5,000! Reports to three national credit bureaus; perfect card for reestablishing credit.
SECURED CARD FOR REBUILDING CREDITprimor Secured Visa Classic
Credit One Bank® Unsecured Visa® with Cash Back Rewards
Get cash back on every purchase. Unsecured credit card with monthly monitoring for credit line increases. Improve your credit history with responsible use.
CASH BACK UNSECURED VISACredit One Bank
Question here is did you get a settlement letter from CA 1 indicating that this would satisfy the debt? It is entirely possible that the unpaid amount was sold to CA 2. If you've got the letter, then fax to CA 2 letting them know that it's paid as agreed, and if they report they are violating the FCRA. Try a goodwill letter with CA 1 and if it doesn't work you can resort to the "Nutcase" approach.
I did satisfy the debt COMPLETELY with CA #1 a few years back. They went ahead and sold my paid off account to CA #2 ANYWAY. I called CA# 1, they sent me a letter of fulfillment to fax to CA #2.
I have no tradeline at all from CA #1 and CA #2 has a neg tradeline, but said they would remove it if I sent them a letter of satisfaction,, which I have. I guess I am just afraid that CA #1 will magically reappear on my credit report.
I mean, why should I HAVE to provide proof that the debt is paid. Shouldn't the burden of proof be on CA #2. THe debt truly does not exist. I guess what I Am really asking is, should I go ahead and provide CA #2 the proof that said account is paid, can I do this without repercussions?
My thought here is that if CA #1 is paid off, why would they bother to start reporting the debt now? If CA #2 wants the letter, and in return they will delete the TL, then send that to them. Again, the big stipulation being that they will delete the TL immediatly, as well as not communicate the status of the debt again to any party (CA #1).
1*CA #2 has a neg tradeline, but said they would remove it if I sent them a letter of satisfaction,
2*I mean, why should I HAVE to provide proof that the debt is paid?
3*Shouldn't the burden of proof be on CA #2.
4*I guess what I Am really asking is, should I go ahead and provide CA #2 the proof that said account is paid,
5*can I do this without repercussions?
1*You realize don't you that sending them this confirms you had a collection at CA1?
2*FDCPA Says you don't have to.
3*FDCPA Says it is.
4*No because you will also prove there was a collection with CA1
5*The repercussion is that admitting there was a debt with CA1 it could end up on your reports.
Why take that chance when you don't have to?
THE END ** *** ** LB 59
Sorry lbrown, too late. I sent it to them. I will keep my fingers crossed. CA #1 was very helpful and kind. They sent the letter of satisfaction immediately, even though I had paid them off years ago. I guess we'll see what happens.