What is this garbage!

I dunno, Becky:

I'm gonna come up with an answer that's more emotionally based than practically based simply because it's too early in the morning to think rationally yet.

But I know that my first reaction to a letter like that would be just to not even bother with them but just go file a suit on them and see if they still want the bk papers when the get to court.

That would be enought to P*** off the Pope.

LOL

Maybe after coffee I'll come up with something better.

 

Well, definitely do not send them a copy of your bk. Like I said in another post similar to yours, tell them what your fee is for doing their work for them. And then royalties of course, for each time they sell your information.

How about a copy of the FCRA? Perhaps they should read it again?

breeze

 

Becky:

There are several things you might do.
Problem is that when you get this kind of stupid answer to a perfectly rational request made by you, it usually means that they are just stalling for time. One of the reasons that might be the case is that traditionally July and August as well as mid to late December are extremely busy times for the credit bureaus for the simple reason that this is vacation time so they run short handed during those times. So to make matters worse, all the "spam" type credit repair firms know this and use it as a lever to try to get more things off their customers credit reports. They really intensify their volume of demands upon the credit bureaus during those times. It's considered to be one of the "cute tricks of the trade" with the credit repair firms who rely on "spam" to get the job done.

As a result, the credit bureaus often attempt to gain more time by making some "stupid" demand for more information. I think the great amount of time between the date of the letter and the time you got it also reflects the fact that the letter just sat in somebody's outbox until they got time to get it sent out. What we often don't think about is the volume of mail those people have to handle daily. Has to be a big truckload or more I would think. I'm sending out 1 or 2 big bags of mail daily, almost all of it Certified RR mail although very little of it is to credit bureaus. Mostly to collection agencies and creditors. But if I'm sendng out that much, then just imagine what their mail volume must be and then in a time of short help like vacation times?????

Stupid replies like that are pretty much "Par for the course" if they happen to be running short on time anyway. Doesn't make it any the less maddening, however. And the heck of it is that you really can't do much about it except comply with their demands or just forget the whole thing for a while unless you want to take the time and trouble to sue them and doing that would not be all that logical either by any stretch of the imagination.

I can only see a couple-two-or three strategies to use in this kind of situation.
1. Just forget about the whole thing, run it through the shredder and wait a month or so and dispute the whole thing all over again.

2. Waste another $3.80 and send them a letter telling them that their reply is frivolous in nature and will therefore not receive further consideration.

3. Quit fiddling around with the credit bureaus as I have done and go after the creditor/collection agency and make them do it for you. Of course, since I don't give them much information to go on in the validation letter, I also get a lot of replies back demanding more information too. And that's exactly what I want them to do. Lots of my customers come back to me with the question of "shouldn't we be giving them more information to go on in the validation letter?" and my reply is always "No. I want them to come back asking for more information because it's just one more mistake they made."

And yes, I know very well that it sounds stupid on my part to say that, but if we stop to think about it, they had plenty of information at hand when they put the hickey on one's credit report in the first place, so they already should have plenty of information with just your name, address and Zip. And the FDCPA says they have to respond with just one thing after receiving your notice of dispute, and that is a letter stating that they have received your dispute and will not contact you again until the matter is resolved.

So I figure that demands for more information absent demanded validation are violations of FDCPA. And that DOES NOT mean that just because they didn't obey both the intent and the letter of the law that I'm going to rush out and sue them by any stretch of the imagination. It's just another "mark on the wall" for possible later use. Before I get done with them they will have committed at least one or more much more serious violations of either FDCPA or state consumer protection laws and when the "payday" comes, I will have them in maybe as much as half a dozen violations of the laws.

As an example, the Oklahoma City Ambulance company, EMSA, put 3 reports on me over 3 separate $750 per each ambulance rides lasting less than &#189 a block from the scene of the car wreck to the hospital. The case had to be adjucated in a court of law because my 16 year old son was injured and so had to go to court for his settlement. The whole thing had to wait for payments because of that. So I threatened to sue them for heavy damages because they violated an Oklahoma law which says that before they can put a hickey on you they have to make demand for an accounting of your assetts and liabilities!!!!!!!!???????

Now then, the only law I can think of that is more stupid is the law that says you can't hunt camels in Arizona. I wouldn't tell an ambulance company what my assets and liabilities were for all the tea in China, but I'll use the dumb law to my advantage in a heartbeat. So I prepare a "dummy" lawsuit demanding damages of $2500 plus court costs and attorney fees and any other punitive damages the court may allow and add in a notice of intent to sue and a form asking for their waiver of service of summons and send it off to them. I got a prompt answer offering to refund the $750 for each ambulance ride and I replied that such a settlement would be perfectly acceptable with the condition that they also remove the items from my credit reports and provide proof of their having done so. Needless to say, it didn't take long for them to comply.

The whole point is that I didn't have to fiddle with the stupid credit bureaus and get dumb answers to my equally dumb demands for their "verification" because if I had, all I would have gotten back was something as dumb as you did or that they had verified and it would remain on my credit report until the cows come home.

Now then, I have to ask, which is the better way to go????

Need I say more?

 

OK, Becky

Your further info starts to make more sense and gives a way to go if you choose to use it.

The obvious answer to me here is again a threat to sue whoever put the hickey there in the first place. It's a defamation of credit/character or libel issue. Whichever or whatever, depending upon the laws in your state as well as the federal codes for providing false information to a credit bureau or whatever may apply to the actual situation in your case.

In all probability, you won't have to worry about actually filing any lawsuits because just the threat to sue for any one of those causes should be enough to scare the pants off them.

I'd just threaten mentioning that they are defaming you by reporting false information.
Another trick is to use a properly worded "100 word statement" which they would not print and distribute on a dare which is exactly what the 100 word statement would be. Either print my following 100 word statement or delete. The first part of the 100 word statement should say that "I did not file any type of bankruptcy. This report is false because it belongs to another person whose name is "Yada Yada". But that's just the start of it. It's what comes after that that really makes them go investigate and be sure what they are saying really is yours for the simple reason that they are not about to print your 100 word statement under any conditions and of course, you give them the option of not printing the 100 word statement you never wanted printed in the first place if they will simply go do what you asked them to do in the first place.

I'm not about to post the actual contents of the 100 word statement that gets the job done because I've seen it mis-used already by those who thought that the idea was so cute they'd just use it for all their disputes even when the report was true. That backfired on them, and they were then unhappy with me. I can't take those kinds of chances, because the results makes me look bad and ruins the tactic for future use when it's a valid thing to do.

No, they won't. They will just sit there fat, dumb and happy waiting for your reply.

 

Hi Bill. I have been following this thread because I am in a similar boat. I did file and had a bk7 discharged in 1997. Several of the accounts listed on my report were included in the bk7 show as open, del. accounts. I disputed these and they sent the same letter. They want me to send copies of bk7 and the entire list of creditors. Am I understanding you correctly, if I don't they will just discontinue the investigation? Can they do this? I know with these jerks what seems to be isn't always, but it seems to me that it is not my job to do this. Do you think that I should send a letter stating that? Is there a law that outlines this for me?
I am sorry to hone in your discussion , yet I am confused as to what to do.
Thanks so much
Micki1970

 

Excuse me, but no, you are not in a similiar situation as Becky.
She says she did not file a bk and it isn't hers. She says hers is being falsely reported. You say that your is correctly reported, but you want it off. That's two entirely different situations.

People who read my comments must understand that what I say in one situation or will work in one situation may or may not apply to another situation, and usually it won't.

See??? That's an entirely different situation and must be approached in an entirely different manner.

You got the same letter as Becky did because from their standpoint, the two situations appeared to be the same. That's perfectly understandable

Yes, to both questions.

No, because it is, in reality, your job to do that. The reason is, as usual, someone is putting the reports in wrong or putting in incorrect information as far as I can see in those types of situatitons as in most others where a valid reason for dispute exists which I think there is in this case as well. So the proper response is to forget about the stupid credit bureaus as is usually the case except for cases like Becky's where obviously incorret information is being reported. You need to go after the source of the report if you wish to diapute and not the reporter of the situation. The usualy "gut feeling" people have is that the credit bureaus are the cause of all one's problems and they are understandably angry with the credit bureaus for putting out false or harmful information which they feel is obviously wrong. But one should never allow emotions to rule what they do.

I learned that lesson the hard way many years ago when I slapped my wife. I've hit her exactly one time in 23 years of marriage and then I did it in an instantaneous reaction to her having slapped me first. I reacted so fast I didn't even have time to think about it, but neither of us will ever forget that horrible day in January of 1986 and violence will never again enter our beautiful marriage. And if gut reactions will get one in that kind of trouble, then it's gotta be wrong in just about all other situations too. So the best thing to do is not to get angry and react but to take the time to think out a reasoned approach. This situation is no different. Most likely, your problem does not lie with the credit bureaus as Becky's does. More than likely it lies with either the system of credit reporting itself or the creditors who are reporting it as charge offs (which they are) and the credit bureau is reporting the bk all at the same time and in the same report.
Therefore, you have the combined problem of the system(credit bureaus reporting methods) and the creditor giving information which is correct from their standpoint to a credit bureau who sees the situation in terms of what is the most convenient way of getting it all into one report thereby saving them time, work and paper. It ends up being a double whammy you cannot easily see the solution to, especially if we allow emotions to get into the picture. So, instead of taking out your displeasure on the credit bureaus, go after the source of the problem which is the creditors. At least that way you get rid of the double whammy and only have the whammy left to deal with and of course you also have to go after that with a different approach.

Don't you just wish??? (LOL)

No problem!

Micki1970

 

Bill,
Thank you for your response. I must disagree. Reading over another thread titled "We'll never get a house" Becky states that she DID file a bk7 in 1995. In the first part of the current thread she says that she received a letter about "information on her bk7." In the earlier thread she also states that she DID file a bk13, and it was dismissed. I have no doubt that she also has an incorrect bk13 on her report, however she received a letter about her bk7, which in fact is a legitimate listing. It appears that she is making an assumption that because she disputed an inaccurate bk13 listing, this letter must pertain to that. I personally would not make that assumption. In logical thought, I would think that by disputing the inaccurate bk 13 the credit bureau is reviewing all bk information listed on her report and therefore wishes to find which of the 3 listed are accurate and which are not. Just a thought.
I don't wish to have the bk7 removed from the report (boy that would be nice, but not fact) I only wish that the accounts that are reporting as late, del. etc. be updated to show the proper information.
I am fairly new to disputes and the whole. My plan was to try to fix the inaccurate information with the credit bureaus first and when and if that failed to go to the creditor next. Now I am stuck. I dispute inaccurate information, they want me to copy and send over 25 pages of information that they should already have access to. Maybe my thoughts are incorrect, but I thought that they have to investigate and verify the disputes as accurate if they continue to list them. I hardly consider asking me for copies when they have the means to acquire them on their own as verifying as accurate. I thought that they have that burden, not me. I have supplied them with my disputes as well as reasons for these disputes, why should I now suffer the extra financial burden of copying and sending them my papers? I don't get paid thousands (probably millions) of dollars to do the footwork for their verifications. This of course is my opinion, and with my luck does not reflect any law! LOL
Trust me when I say I am not angry beyond reasonable thought! I want these all straighten out, because I am new to the process I am just being very cautious as to my next step. I am thinking with a clear rational head. For this reason you will see me asking a ton of questions, I donâ??t want to make a mistake.
If in fact they have or shortly will discontinue the investigation. I will immediately start contacting the creditors.
Again thank you for your response.
Micki1970

 

Hi Becky. Please don't misunderstand my post. I understand completely your dispute. In my situation I received the letter, yet my husband did not. My suggestion was that it could possible be that the credit bureau is in fact trying to straighten it out by reviewing ALL bk information, rather than just the one you are disputing, again, just a thought.
I too never disputed the actual bk7. What I did dispute is certain accounts WERE included in the bk7 and therefore should say so. I question how can a company verify this information without the credit bureau verifying that a bk7 took place?
I totally agree why should you have to do the running for them. That is bs, itâ??s their job, not yours. I mean come on, especially if the bk13 isnâ??t yours, how the heck do you prove that on paper? In a way it reminds me of a situation I had some years ago with occupational taxes. I was a stay at home mom and was sent a tax bill for the highest possible tax bracket for occupation. I called; told them I didnâ??t even work. They told me I had to prove it? Yes, and I would have to supply more proof then just our tax return. Long story short, I invited them to come to my home everyday for a month to view me in my job. Needless to say they declined and took a written statement instead! LOL
I am so sorry for your troubles. I know that in your other thread that you were treated quite poorly and I hope that you donâ??t think that I am doing the same. I was just making a suggestion as to the possible reason.
Hang in there, and maybe I am right, they are just trying to straighten it all out. Probably not, but maybe.
Good luck
Micki1970

 

OK! Whatever! I was under the impression that she was claiming it was not hers at all. I'll go back and re-study the threads here and see what she says again. But let us move on.

Quite understandable to say the least! (LOL)

That too sounds like good logical thinking, but those, like yourself, who deal with them for very long at all should be and usually are quickly initiated to the world of pettifoggery, obfuscatons and general malicious chicanery. Disgusting, but nonetheless true.

You need to read the whole of the law, not just the part that you happen to like best. The part you may not have noticed was that the above is true unless they request more information, find the request frivolours and yada yada yada. Let us then move on to what it might be that they could possibly use for excuses to demand more information. On second thought let's forget that as I doubt that PBM's servers have enough hard disk space for all of the reasons they could possibly come up with as you and so many others have discovered to their dismay.

Again, it's a matter of convenience to them. Why should they put themselves out, (poor abused souls that they consider themselves to be) when they can just demand it of you and hope that's enough to fry your bacon for you so you leave them alone.

Simply because they can make you do it or suffer the consequences. If you want the answers to the questions you are asking, you have to stop looking at it from your perspective and start looking at it from what you can imagine as their perspective. Not that doing so helps resolve the situation, just brings some degree of understanding.

Not only does not reflect any law, but does not fit in with their viewpoint on the problem they perceive as being theirs which would be to do something worthwhile for a change.

I certainly don't mind your questions, and I doubt that many others do either. What I fail to understand is why you and so many others want to keep chasing their tails (so to speak) rather than going to the source of the problem. I do wish I could find the answer to that question. Is it that it is so easy just to fire off a letter to the credit bureaus and vent ones frustrations upon them? If so, I respectfully submit that since their chances of success are approximately 40% and the remaing 60% will result in even more frustration why is it that they choose to fight a battle of wits when only half-armed and the odds against a sucessful campain so heavily stacked against them??? What is your reason for fighting with the credit bureaus first instead of going to the source of the problem first where you have at least a crying chance albeit about equally small. In the final analysis, one is left trying to rectify the errors they made when they filed bankruptcy in the first place. In truth, the most logical way to fight a BK off your records is to spend a few years at the law library and at the courthouse tring to learn how to discover reverseable errors in the original bankruuptcy filing so that one can go back to court and file motions to get it reversed in court on grounds of judicail or other error. I have serious doubts that I can find anyone(including myself) who is so anxious to get that show on the road that they would be willing to spend all of their available spare time for the next 10 or 20 years to accomplish their goal. So the next answer is to go after the creditor in an almost(but not quite totally and completely) equally difficult task of trying to trick the creditor into thinking that it's an account that still falls under FDCPA or that they are likely to get sued for providing false information to a credit bureau or both. On one hand, either of the above approaches are not all that likely to achieve the desired results and on the other, dealing with obfuscation, pettifoggery, chicanery and general skulldoggery of the liars, thieves and hipocrites at the credit bureaus. Like every one else, I speak every language in the world except Greek and Greek is, lametably, their language of choice. But, what I do find humorously interesting is how quickly they learn plain old english every time they see a bloody club hanging over their heads in the form of a good stiff lawsuit. They start speaking my language real quick then. But the opportunity to beat them violently about the head and shoulders in such a fashion does not arise all that often.

I'd assume that such is the case. One thing you might do is to go down to the courthouse and see how big your file is and if it's not going to cost too much get a copy of all the documents(not court certified) and send them the file and tell them to figure it out. Give them 30 days to do so and if they don't, file a lawsuit on them for failing to verify within the 30 day period. That way the subject of courtroom discussion would not be your bankruptcy but rather why they failed to obey the law.

That's the way you have to go about some of these things. Get their minds off the subject of discussion you can't win at and on to something you can win at. Maybe they would rather delete than fight you in court. If so, you win without ever going to court or filing any papers either.

 

Here is another emal just in from a person using my ideas.

There was more in the email than that, but it's not for public disclosure since it deals with another problem the person is still having and wants more info on how to cure.

And that's not the first success this person has had by a long shot. So although my last post didn't give you any answers you particularly wanted to hear, my methods do work and the proof of it is getting to be legion.

 

NO WAY JOSE!

The law of the land is that they made the accusation of your obligation. They are the ones that have to prove their accusation and if they can't do that, then no tax is owed. By law, you don't have to prove anything whatsoever. The burden of proof is on them, not you. They have to prove the debt with a lawful assessment of taxation which is a legally specified document, not just a demand by some tomfool tax collector.

 

===================================

==================
=========================
Might be they can't understand english!

 

Becky,
You didn't blow up! I think that looking at my options I will do both. Send a copy of the bk and contact the creditors.
I consider myself a very kind, considerate & understanding person. As I am sure you are. It is a sad thing to see that a common goal (fixing credit wrongs) can make folks tear into one another as happened in your previous thread. I am so thankful to have found this board and the help that comes with it is tremendous. I can understand how some folks may become discouraged and quit coming here. I haven't had a lot a experience personally with attacks, yet, call me a cry baby, but I have been on the verge of tears several times seeing how some others treat people. It has me afraid to ask certain questions for fear that someone with a righteous bug up their ass will rip me a new one.
I know I screwed up, I screwed up major. I have paid over and over again as you have. And when you start getting accused of doing things you didn't, well that's just crappy. Thank you for support, it is much needed.
I do again wish you the best of luck.
Micki1970