I have been trying to have a charge-off removed from my credit report. I have requested validation from the CA â?? Sherman Acqusition â?? three times, beginning five months ago, with no response. And I have also sent the estoppel. I then set copies of the letters and the US Post Office return receipts to the credit bureaus, showing that Sherman did in fact receive requests for validation from me and requesting that the credit bureaus delete the charge-off from my credit report. The credit bureaus, however, refused to delete the entry, saying that Sherman had provided them with validation. So I have decided to sue and I'm planning to claim $2000 for the following violations: FDCPA 15 USC 1692g Validation of Debts 1692e(8) Communicating False Credit Information Based on the situation I described earlier, are these claims accurate, and are there others I should be making? I am planning to ask for $1000 per violation. Thanks in advance for your help.
1*The credit bureaus, however, refused to delete the entry, saying that Sherman had provided them with validation. 2*The credit bureaus, however, refused to delete the entry, saying that Sherman had provided them with validation. I then set copies of the letters and the US Post Office return receipts to the credit bureaus, showing that Sherman did in fact receive requests for validation from me and requesting that the credit bureaus delete the charge-off from my credit report. 3*The credit bureaus, however, refused to delete the entry, Nook_Rich ======================== 1*It don't work that way. Sherman has to validate with you not the CRAs. 2*The CRA s just ratted on Sherman.It's a $1000 violation on Sherman because they did not validate with you first.If they did this with all 3 CRAs that's $3000 on this violation alone. If Sherman did not mark as disputed at any of the 3 CRAs that's another $3000. 3*This is a CRA $1000 violation: Reporting info that they know or have reason to believe is inaccurate. If all 3 CRAs did this there's another $3000. These violations total $9000. ****************************************************** NEW MEMBERS READ THIS. http://consumers.creditnet.com/straighttalk/board/showthread.php?s=&postid=410243#post410243 ******************************************************* >
****************************************************** NEW MEMBERS READ THIS. http://consumers.creditnet.com/straighttalk/board/showthread.php?s=&postid=410243#post410243 ******************************************************* >1*I then set copies of the letters and the US Post Office return receipts to the credit bureaus, showing that Sherman did in fact receive requests for validation from me and requesting that the credit bureaus delete the charge-off from my credit report. The credit bureaus, however, refused to delete the entry, saying that Sherman had provided them with validation. Nook_Rich ============== 1*Here is another CRA violation. Refusing to consider your info. If all 3 CRAs done that you can add another $3000 to the other $9000.
Keep us posted on your results. It sounds like were in the same boat. I'm filing in small claims Tuesday morning Aginst Sherman, EQ and TU. I'll let you know if I find out anything useful. When I was looking up Shermans registerd agent in Texas they had listed a CT corperation and the address for some guy in New York listed as manager that is who I am planning on having served. I did the VOD- Estopple procedure with Aligis Group but it's the same company. Sherman is the one on my credit report but Alegis was the one trying to collect. Maybe someone has some thoughts on that. Anyway best of luck to you.
When I asked the lady at CRA's about this, she said it was because they didn't reply back. Well if the OC won't verify info then how the hell can Sherman? dmho ************************* The CRAs know Sherman is a con artist, yet for them to take this position makes THE CRAs accomplice of Sherman's. The CRAs are guilty of aiding and abetting. ****************************************************** NEW MEMBERS READ THIS. http://consumers.creditnet.com/straighttalk/board/showthread.php?s=&postid=410243#post410243 ******************************************************* >
Yea! nook-rich any updated info? I,m due to go to court next week. EQ and TU answered the summons and I sent them a letter outlining the claims against them and to exsplain to them that I also had proof. I also told them we could settle out of court if they would delete account from credit report. I have not heard from them yet and plan on being in court with my case prepared. Good news (I think), Sherman never answered the court summons so the court clerk called me up and asked if I could come down to the court house and sign some papers. I went down and she asked if I had any supporting documents. I did and gave her copies. She said she would turn them over to the judge and I would probable get a default judgement against Sherman. I think that should support my claims against EQ and TU. Crossing my fingers.
Re: Re: Suing the CA This brings out one of our most powerful tools... With any CA who you are having problems with, you can demand under CUSHMAN that the CRA verifies, not with the CA, but with the original source of the reporting, THE OC. Demand an OC Verification, if the CA doesn't respond. If the OC doesn't respond to the CRA verification request within the 30 days, the CA goes bye bye. And if you're looking to get a suit against the OC as well, if they verify it to the CRA, then the OC has placed themselves in front of the firing squad, along side the CA. And since demanding an OC verification *IS* different then the verification through the CA, so you may be able to over-come the 'PREVIOUSLY INVESTIGATED' stamp this way.
