So you think I shoiuld send a letter to the CA too? Now that I think of it, the credit report lists the ORIGINAL creditor as the dentist so now what if I'm wasting my time with them? ughh the thought I have to deal with the CA is bugging me out, that lady I spoke to was a complete idiot... she had no intention of listening to anything I had to say Am i back to square one or what...
You can always send a copy of your letter to your attorney, or anyone else you want to, whether you noted "CC:" at the bottom, or not. Absolutely send a dispute letter to the CA, ASAP! You want it on the record, in writing, that the debt is in dispute. If the CA is the one putting the Tl on your CR, then they are the one you have to force to remove it. You already disputed thru the CRA, and the CA "verified". Now you must dispute with the CA, in writing, certified, getting it to them as fast as possible. Send it both certified, so you can show they got it, and a second one Certified, Return Receipt Requested, so you can show they either signed for it, or refused to sign for it. Normally, this whole dispute process could take weeks to months. The CA may not even reply. Or they might just sell the debt to some other CA. Until they do reply, they should at least be marking the debt as in dispute. In addition, they claim they sent you notice, presumably years ago, although when, and to what address, they haven't even told you. Since they claim you didn't respond within 30 days of that alleged initial notice, they may assume the debt is valid. They thus claim to be able to "continue collection" (keep the negative TL on your reports) for however long it takes to get "validation" from the OC. It is thus to their advantage to claim, as they have, that you didn't dispute within 30 days of their initial letter (which you never even got, on a debt you never owed), so that they can just leave the negative TL on your reports for the next year in the hope that you will be forced to pay it by your lender. The CA has nothing to gain by admitting the debt is invalid, or not yours, unless they are facing possible legal costs and payment of damages, and are convinced they will lose. It is NOT a waste to get the OC to send you a letter that this is not your account, and to get the OC to send a copy of that letter to the CA. You can use it to undermine their assumption that the debt is valid, especially if they actually take no action to validate the debt, and just "pretend" they did. Since you also already have contacted who they claim is the OC, if they now claim they requested validation, and they didn't, you can just ask the OC, who increasingly wants to wash his hands of this whole mess.
"the thought I have to deal with the CA is bugging me out, that lady I spoke to was a complete idiot... she had no intention of listening to anything I had to say Am i back to square one or what..." No, you are not back to square one. You are starting to proceed with documentation that you have disputed, necessary to even trigger your rights under federal law, and essential if you have to go to court. The CA knows you are an unsophisticated consumer, and as long as you are phoning them they have nothing to worry about. You do, however, have to go down all paths. You cannot count on any one approach being the one that will succeed. (Think Powell doctrine, overwhelming force, not Rumsfeld, barely enough, let's hope it works.) That is why, even though you are starting to send out letters, you must also go down the paths that may lead to litigation. They are also the ones that are most likely not to lead to litigation, as well as most likely to minimize your damages given all actions by the other parties. You have seen what happens when you assume the other party will do the right thing once you bring it to their attention: you get screwed. This game was rigged and stacked against the consumer long ago, and federal and state rights available to the consumer have been kept weak by banking and collection interests. When the CA steps out of even these protected bounds, you can't afford to waste the opportunity that offers to force a resolution. Thus, it is important that the attorney you work with be both familiar and experienced with both federal FDCPA and FCRA, as well as CA state law (Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, if I remember correctly).
By the way, regarding how this account was apparently in collection for years, but only showed up on your files shortly after your mortgage inquiry: It may have been reported using the information from the original dentist billing account, which may have been different from you enough that pulling your own report would not include it. Credit files are not just under, say, a unique SSN, and you get everything under that number. They are under the name, with variations, combined with SSN, and can even be reported without any SSN. If between the time you first pulled your report, and you later pulled it when your lender notified you of the problem, all the CA would have had to have done would be to "correct" some aspect of the original TL so that it now matched YOU. Maybe your SSN was added, maybe one of your addresses, etc. The TL, which had formerly not been yours, was now yours, which it had apparently been for "years".
Some information on the "Cynical Hypothesis": In addition to various skip tracing database companies, the big three CRAs have services available to businesses to notify them of changes to credit files of consumers they have tagged: http://www.experian.com/products/skip_locator.html http://www.equifax.com/biz/solutions/debtrecovery.shtml http://www.transunion.com/content/p.../business/solutions/CollectionsManagement.xml But this also showed up over the weekend, in an article, "Credit Bureaus Share Your Loan Application", By Kenneth R. Harney Saturday, March 4, 2006; Washington Post, Page F01: http://www.paymentsnews.com/2006/03/credit_bureaus_.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/03/AR2006030300843.html "The information can be highly detailed and sensitive. Mortgage Inquiry Data's Web site offers loan inquirers' credit scores, open mortgage balances, loan-to-value ratios, monthly mortgage payments, revolving debt balances and other personal financial data." These "sales leads" were triggered by a consumer's lender making a mortgage inquiry on the consumer's file. The buyers of this information had no consumer initiated permissible purpose under FCRA to obtain credit report information, since the consumer had not initiated any transaction with them, nor had the lender shopped the loan to them. In fact, these leads were sent to competitors of the lender. From the Harney article, this appears to be more than just credit header information, as allowed under FCRA for promotional inquiries. It would be interesting to know if this transfer of information originating in consumer credit reports resulted in an inquiry notation on the consumer's file, and what type of inquiry was disclosed to the consumer. "In promotional material sent to lenders, Jesse Leeds, sales director for Mortgage Inquiry Data, said his business is "compliant with all privacy and do-not-call laws." The promotion also claimed that the firm is "able to provide [its services] by working in conjunction with the three major credit bureaus." However, in an interview, Leeds said the firm gets its credit data from just one bureau, Equifax, not Experian or TransUnion. Spokesmen for Equifax and Experian confirmed that their firms do offer 24-hour "trigger" lists of applicants for mortgage credit. TransUnion did not comment on whether it provides overnight contact data. Equifax and Experian said their marketing of overnight mortgage inquiry leads violated no federal or state rules and is merely a speedier version of their routine sales of lists for other preapproved offers of credit." Regarding the other company named, Intellidyn Corp., note that they provide products both for the above mortgage lead marketting, as mentioned in the Harney article, but also for supporting collections. See their website: http://www.intellidyn.com/list_services/industry/collections.aspx Since they apparently serve customers in both the mortgage lending, and collections industries, and obtain information directly from CRAs using mortgage inquiry based triggers, is that information also sold to collections industry customers?
At least i know if i get the letter from the dental office and provide it to the lender, they are not going to require me to pay off the debt and I can pursue having it cleared up. I emailed to my attorney copies of the letters I had written, one initially that I faxed to their office last Monday, and the other one I mailed Friday. He said he will write them a letter this afternoon, he would've done it initially but i just didn't want to spend too much but now I'd rather he get all the money rather than these people. IF by miracle in the meantime my letter reaches them and they decide to fax their letter back as originally they told me, then based on your advice to also send something in writing to the CA, I will have the attorney write them a letter instead and will have a record of the letters I sent to the original party and the attorney's letter to the CA...I;ll ask he send it registered like you said. Thanks for all of your suggestions I am following....I was so lost and upset when I originally posted but now I have a plan of attack
wow, what a trip reading things from the creditor's side of the fence, and how info is disbursed about you within 24 hrs of applying for a mortgage!!! Now that I think of it, a morgage company uses a credit report pulling agency who they pay a fee to pull your credit through. I wonder if they "sell" ur name/social to 3rd parties once the mortgage co. pulls your credit...interesting how so many people get your info and during this period I have been getting a lot of mail from different mortgage companies!!! Also, the credit bureaus are just so strange. I was on the phone talking to Equifax (my score with them is higher than with Experian, so I am focusing with Experian who has my middle score the lender is using for my loan), so I'm on the phone with Equifiax because in their report they had my first name spelled two different ways. Also, they had my address one listed with a unit number and one without, so I was on the phone with the lady to have it corrected. This was a few weeks ago...so she tells me that they have TWO different versions of my credit report, they are not combined and both have different info on it, not all the creditors are listed on both the same. She said in order for them to combine it into one report, i had to mail a copy of my drivers license and social security card! This was way into our conversation when I was already going to hang up and she was never going to bring it up, but she had warmed up to me and it was like it "slipped" out. She said it has been this way for many years under my name and she wasn't clear on exactly why only that it would be combined after they received my social and Driver's lic. That was just so strange. Anyways, I mailed it to them only this past friday, I don't want to risk my score gong down or changing in any way, especially with reports combining, at this sensitive time while waiting for my loan to go through.
"At least i know if i get the letter from the dental office and provide it to the lender, they are not going to require me to pay off the debt and I can pursue having it cleared up." Has your lender confirmed that the dental office letter will resolve the credit report entry for their purposes? Are they willing to use rapid rescoring, or otherwise ignore the invalid debt, to give you the original terms offered? You might send your own letter to the CA, as outlined above, certifed, for speed. You might ALSO have your attorney send his letter. Certified. Have him send you a file copy, too. There is cost in delay. There is impact in your attorney sending a letter. But there is no harm in sending both, even if they arrive the same day. Choose the manner of business that works best for your interests.
By the way, do not wait for the dentist's letter before putting the CA on notice that the debt is in dispute. You can always follow up with a second letter to the CA, with a copy of the dentist's letter, demanding immediate removal of their erroneously reported debt, if your attorney thinks this will push things along faster.
Geeze u must be an attorney the way you think things through. DUHHH...that is an excellent idea to have the attorney send letters to both parties and I'll have it in my records. Yes, the mortgage co. confirmed they would not have me pay off the dentist if I get a letter from them stating I do not owe them anything. I told them that I don't but the credit bureaus were not taking it off when I asked them to. I told the dental office this which is why I think they are delaying things. I'm gonna check to see if they got my letter on usps.com!
I'm tempted to not even include the dentist's letter to them...I feel like why am I doing their work, when I offered to give the CA the dentist's # for her to call just like I had to confirm I don't owe, they have no intentions to confirm the debt's validity that they are trying to collect, so why am I doing all the work for them? It is just so annoying. Mayabe I should ask my attorney to straight out send a letter telling them I'm going to sue them instead. I bet that'll get their attention.
I am not an attorney. I have just had to deal with similar shit, but had more time to do it and learned that unless you tightly herd these ferral vermin, you will get bit. CA employees are not much above fast food service, just rewarded more for being rude. In your FIRST letter to the CA, keep to the point. The debt is DISPUTED, you want VALIDATION, etc. You are sending it to stake out your rights under federal and state law. If that solves it, fine, but if it doesn't, you don't want them slipping out of liability for damages because you only talked to them on the phone. When you know they have received your dispute letter, and you have in hand your dentist's letter documenting that it is not your debt, you can start pressuring them to drop it. You can now dispute the debt with the CA, as a FACTA dispute, including a copy of the dentist's letter. They probably claimed they could ignore your first letter, in a deliberate misrepresentation of FDCPA. FACTA gives you rights to dispute erroneous reporting with any DF (data furnisher), which would include them (or even an OC). You can simultaneously dispute again with the CRA, again including a copy of the dentist's letter. Under FCRA, they are supposed to consider information provided by the consumer, which they usually ignore. In addition, when they again refer the dispute to the CA, if the CA "verifies" again, it may become "continued collection" on a debt they have not validated, FDCPA violation. You also start undermining the claim that they will make if it goes to court that all their errors were 'bona fide", and that they were made despite having in place procedures to ensure such errors do not happen. You would think it would not take all this to keep your good name and be left alone. It may not take all this, but if you don't go into it preparing for the worst case, you may have to retrace your steps when your initial attempts fail. Thus, when you go down all paths, you are in the strongest position to negotiate at the earliest point. You are better off in the long run reaching an acceptable settlement earlier, than having the damage stretch out, even if you can then sue for more. To reach that earlier settlement, your opponent must know you mean business, and that they will lose. Remember the attitude of Ms. Nice? That is the attitude you need: This is business, and if you have to roll right over them, you will.
"I'm tempted to not even include the dentist's letter to them...I feel like why am I doing their work, when I offered to give the CA the dentist's # for her to call just like I had to confirm I don't owe, they have no intentions to confirm the debt's validity that they are trying to collect, so why am I doing all the work for them? It is just so annoying. Mayabe I should ask my attorney to straight out send a letter telling them I'm going to sue them instead. I bet that'll get their attention." It has nothing to do with doing their work. You do what you have to to get what you want. If you want to get paid for the additional work they require of you, look to their FDCPA violations, and get paid for it. They can pay your attorney, too. The law is what it is, use it. Regarding dispute letters, and intent to sue letters, discuss it with your attorney. Just remember that the dispute letters are sent to preserve your rights under FDCPA and FCRA, whether you sue or not. You probably need to send them whether you also sue or not, otherwise they can sidestep a lot of liability that would be the basis for your suit. As for sending them an ITS, if they already have been sent a dispute letter, and another letter demanding they stop collection on the invalid debt, backed up by the dentist's letter, an ITS probably would not make much difference. If you have been able to proceed with your loan, on favorable terms based on the dentist's letter, the next goal is making the debt go away permanently. Actually serving papers, based on violations to date, would probably be more effective, and anything less would probably just result in the debt being quickly sold to another JDB, where you get to play the game all over again. You want to close this matter while it is in their possession. Notice the common thread: "follow thru".
Ok, thanks for keeping me on track. I called the dental office, the lady put me on hold for at least 5 minutes, (wouldn't transfer me to the original guy at the office I've been talking to) then said rudely that he had told me he'd send the letter after 2pm today. I said all he said was to call him at 11am and once at 2pm so I was calling to follow up. I hope my letter will only help to move them along once they get it this afternoon. I have no idea why it has to be after 2pm except that it will be near the end of the day and another postponement. I left a message for my lawyer that they might be faxing the letter to him after 2pm, to hold off sending his until we see what they send...I hate that once 2 rolls around, i'll be waiting for it, then 3 i'll call they'll get annoyed and tell me to wait and so on. I'm surprised at all this coming from a dental office! I just wonder if the dentist is aware how they treat people who are not their patients, especially a situation like this they could get in trouble about....stalling and making stories, not following through etc.
Hold off on sending his letter? Why? There is nothing wrong with sending both your letters even if they are redundant. The reality of your financial predicament makes it entirely rational. In fact, you might send a follow-up letter to them(certified, of course), and FAX it now also, summarizing the results of your phone call, and their promise to send their letter at 2PM today. Keep it polite and strictly business. Ask that they both mail you a copy, and FAX it to your attorney. Include your attorney's FAX number. Pin down in writing whatever is "agreed" to, at the time it is agreed to. As you have seen so far, they will either do it, or it will slip again. If they send it as they said they would, fine. Your letter did no harm. If they fail to send it, and it slips again, you now have in writing what they had been promising to do. If this matter keeps being dragged out, until it finally impacts your pocketbook, the long trail of letters starts to weigh against any claims made verbally. The unchallenged written trail becomes the only reviewable reality.
Creditors send letters all the time, asking for payment but possibly crossing in the mail with payments sent. You don't have to wait until you know they have slipped meeting their verbal promises to put them on written notice of what you are expecting and when. You are not making threats, and you keep your letters direct and to the point, but your systematic approach also sends a message. They have obligations to meet. If they fail to meet them, you are not dropping the matter. This is not your dentist. He doesn't have to like you. It is just business.
Hey!!! My lawyer just emailed to me that he just got the fax sent to him from the dental office!!!!!!!!!! I am so excited...it's late afternoon and I'm sure they must've received my letter thanks to you I sent, which pushed them to finally do it cuz i just can't believe they really had an intention to do it, the way they've been playing games...I'm so excited!!! you saved me 1700...now I am motivated to deal with the CA to put them in check...i'm so happy, thanks so much!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! what a learning experience, just the whole writing letters to keep a record of things, I'll use that in other aspects with other matters, I feel you've taught me so much, thank you so much!!
With your letter from the dentist, you can presumably close the loan on your house. Once you do so, you will have blunted their main threat, and time will shift in your favor. If the CA still creates problems with your lender, you will need to raise the stakes and hit them hard. Remember this is not just about $1700, it is about your good name, your new home, ongoing damages due to delay, lost appreciation to you and damages to the seller should the deal collapse, embarrassment, etc. and other damages directly caused by their illegal actions. It may even involve misuse of or illegal access to your credit report information. Your attorney will have to be comfortable taking them to court, and also seeking his compensation from them, as allowed by law. You want them on notice of your dispute of the debt quickly, just in case. Be sure to finish the job, or you may have to go thru the whole thing all over again, most likely at an inconvenient time. Now proceed with your letter to the CA. Remember your goal for this letter is to dispute the debt, preserving you rights, and ensure you have the documentation to prove they have received your dispute. Send it by fastest method, presumably certified, special delivery, with CRRR follow-up. (belt plus suspenders). On confirming their receipt of your letter, you look at both a second dispute thru the CRAs, and demanding removal based on the OC's letter. Unless they quickly notify you they are folding, you will need to pull a full set of reports, to verify all CRAs they are posting on, including any failures to note "in dispute" or other violations. Even if they do quickly fold, you will need to hammer out an agreement, using your attorney, binding them to annul the erroneous debt and agree to not ever sell or collect on it. Your lever is their already existing violations, which you could proceed on, and may still choose to proceed on. Otherwise, they will want to just send you some letter saying they have chosen "to close the account" or some such language, after which they will then sell it to someone else.
As background, FDCPA violations during your phone calls may result in liability to both the CA, and that specific employee. They can both be liable, especially for the "use of deception", "harassment or abuse", "threatening to take actions they cannot legally take", failure to disclose various things, such as your right to dispute, and similar actions, and that FDCPA liability is based on their actions in collecting the debt, regardless of whether it is a valid debt, in dispute, or whether it is even your debt or not. There are similar provisions in California law, and you might check both to see where the penalties are greater. See FDCPA sections 805 thru 808: http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fdcpa/fdcpact.htm#805 Since one of their responses may be to harass you by phone, to try to scare you into backing off, claiming you somehow admitted or acknowledged it was your debt, or getting you to pay some part of the debt which they may then claim makes it your debt, you will want to go over all this with your attorney, or pass the matter off to him, if you are forced to deal further with this CA. It may be simpler if it goes that far to direct all contact to him, in which case any direct contact with you would be more clearly harassment.
http://www.ftc.gov/os/comments/FACTA-implementscorestudy/514719-00019.htm "I work in the real estate industry and REGULARLY see customers forced to pay debts they do not owe because a collection agency bought a list from a credit bureau of those with recent mortgage inquiries and were able to get a partial name match and put the items on the credit report. The most recent case was just last week. Oh, and as for disputing the accuracy in this case...we can't even figure out where to send the check that the mortgage company required to be collected at closing. There is no contact information on the credit report for the collection agency- so the consumer was not able to contact them. "
