Date of Last Activity and Date of First Delinquency (the commencement date) are two different things. Date of last activity has nothing to do with when an account reaches the SOL or dropping off your report. Now...a partial payment WILL reset the commencement date IF the consumer defaults again. So, if consumer was late once in Jan 2009, then never late again until Jan 2013, and subsequently defaults on that account, the SOL and 7 year period start from Jan 2013. Same thing if a consumer were to pay off a CA account that had a DoFD of Jan 2009, just because the consumer paid the debt doesn't reset the commencement date. Now this isn't to say that there aren't 'quality' CA's out there that wouldn't do this to a consumer, but it's not legal. Section 605 (c) of the FCRA: (c) Running of Reporting Period (1) In general. The 7-year period referred to in paragraphs (4) and (6)6 of subsection (a) shall begin, with respect to any delinquent account that is placed for collection (internally or by referral to a third party, whichever is earlier), charged to profit and loss, or subjected to any similar action, upon the expiration of the 180-day period beginning on the date of the commencement of the delinquency which immediately preceded the collection activity, charge to profit and loss, or similar action.
DoLA isn't the same as DoFD. Reporting goes by DoFD, not DoLA. A DF can report an updated DoLA, for anything, even if they're just updating the balances.
I see. and that makes sense. I'm on information overload right now. I'm dealing with only 2 CA's from since i got on this forum and these 2 have been putting me online reading massive amounts of info just to makes sure it don't trip up and STILL i have... keep in mind i have 32 negs to get rid off (at this pace 90% will fall off before i can get to them!) Thanks both of you have been the most helpful on this site , and Jason too! I know i mention going over to the CB forum a few times in my other posts and it's nothing against you guys but it's the internet and i have on this site mainly you 3 guys that are consistently responding and almost never giving wrong advice. CB is like the encylopedia where you find something out but there is like 100 people arguing if its right or not so then i end up back on here searching the forum to see if you 3 have responded to that situation. hope you guys aren't offended! So here's what i found: The DOE dispute thing usually leads nowhere unless there is a blatant obvious error. DOE will allow some collection fee's, so i think i would be wasting time here. I earlier offered a PFD at $137 on a $188 debt . They accepted $137 but would only mark the account "settled". They sited FRC 682.410 (b)(5) that state they "MUST" report the debt and continue to report it" . which is true BUT the FRC never states they can "never" remove it from the report. If i'm going to pay do you think i should offer the full amount on another PFD? be more apologetic and explain now that i know i thought all wage garnishment was done and ask for a "goodwill PFD?" And if that results in a no, should i then asked for "Paid in full" and continue to send CRA disputes? if so how often? Trying to find the best way to get this off before 2016! Thanks!
Also, the first CA that was assigned by this Guaranty Agency violated FDCPA by sending me out a bill requesitng payment AFTER i sent and they signed for my DV Letter. It was a one time screw-up and they handed the account back over to the Guaranty Agency once i mentioned that in my second DVL to them. Do you think this worth pursuing? Is a $1000 violation fee possible? they may claim bona fide paperwork error. I ask because if i offer or do pay the guaranty agency i'm thinking that might count as admittance and could be used as a defense. BTW the guaranty agency has sent a new CA after me but they obviouly had business relationship with the first CA and probably still do and would help them if needed (example they could claim the CA had the same extension of rights that they do , hence the FDCPA rules do not apply since this is in regards to a student loan debt.) .. I've seen case laws that dismisses the CA to having those rights and but there maybe cases that the CA was granted those rights that i have yet to see. https://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/94/94.F3d.1260.93-35555.html Brannan v.s. USA Funds. Maybe one of you guys will know if i would be wasting my time pursuing the $1000 fine...
It's always worth pursuing. If I rob a bank, and I open an account to deposit the money back into the same bank, does that mean that I didn't rob the bank in the first place?
Jam Good point. Should i just send out an ITS to that first CA and request they pay me the $? Do you have any links/lead as to what that letter or request would look like? As for the NEW CA: I have to send out another DVL to the new CA the "OC" is sending after me. Should i mention that i had already asked ECMC for time to review this matter since they will not provide any detailed information. Should i tell them that the account was already pulled back from the first CA that tried to collect? Or just send them a Standard DVL? or C&D and just stay quiet. As for the "OC": I'm stuck as to how to get them to agree to delete the account from my CR. Since they deal with the gov. i'm sure they would be less likely to feel obligated. Should i just get to a "paid in full" status and be done with it hope it fall off in 2016? Can i continually dispute it in hopes they will just ignore it one time and have it fall off? If so how often to CRA dispute it? "Funding": Glad you found something worth the while here!?!?!
You'll want to write something that sounds like you, but this is something along the lines of what I write. The suit isn't complicated. The local court or their web site may even have a template available. The local court's template here is really this simple. A lot more simple than the 30+ page suits that I drafted a few years ago... and still equally as effective... It really helps resolving cases now, for me, if the company takes the 2 seconds to do a PACER search on my name when they see the suit, it saves them the heartache when the countdown timer reaches zero.
Most excellent Jam. i'll be working on this tomorrow. Also getting great advice on the HIPAA situation in my other thread too. I'll update tonight or tomorrow and please always feel free to comment/advice on any of my up coming situations as i will need it since i've decided to go hard at all this Negs on my report. I realize going one at a time will take FOREVER! =)
Will be sending a final PFD for the full amount. if a no go I'll try one last time with PFND. Then going to DOE ombudsman. As for their new CA they sent me: I will just be sending a modified C&D letter basically saying stop all collection activity, i have been in constant contact with the "OC" and unless you want to be named in a lawsuit or conversations with my state attorney or the DOE ombudsman, go find another account to go play with. Do not call & submit any final response in writing. I did not feel the need to request documents or send and official DVL because the "OC" already has sent me their miserly attempt at validation and i am already arguing that with them......They should just be mad at the OC for giving an account that is already being worked on by the "OC" ...............I have not sent this letter out yet so if you think i should still standard DVL let me know. July 5th deadline
Update: PFD was a NO. Basically my last letter went to their internal Company Ombudsman (not the federal one). I sent all backed up info of all correspondence and requested details on the account.. they did not send me accounting details but a compelling dated recantation of my loan. Then they finally attached a detail of the account that shows what happened when it was wage garnished (i wasn't even noticing the money being taken)... All in all they have pretty good Ammo and i'm satisfied they are the right ones to pay and the amount is correct... SOOO 3 Questions: 1) They say they will not hold back the NEW CA they hired. however i've always kept in contact with them. When sending the PFND am i in the right to send it to them and NOT the new CA? 2)My basis for sending the PFND is that I absolutely do not appreciate them sending my personal information to another company, therefore i would be willing to pay the account in full if they agree to not disclose this to any third party company and mark off my account as paid in full. Does that make sense? 3)If PFND doesn't work. What is the best way this account should be marked? Closed, Paid in full? It is SHOCKINGLY currently listed as: A) Open account (they are NOT the OC but the Agency Guarantor) B) Base on this they are reporting every month that i'm not paying. I thought they cannot do that! C) Loan type is marked as "student loan" D) Status is: "Collection Account" Guys i'm reading the web but: How is a Collector suppose to report on your credit report? I need to know because i want them to report right BEFORE i send payment to have them mark it as Paid in Full.... I do not want them to have gotten away with ruining my credit by reporting in a wrong way and then just slap a "paid in full" status on top of that! To me it seems like they are acting like i have a open line of credit that i'm not paying on monthly ... Doesn't this provide maximum damage to my CR? In my last letter i asked them to mark the account as disputed, which they have done but to me it doesn't seem fair for them to report like that...
