Yea! 688 to 791 in a day!!!

I'm doing the happy dance!!!!!

I disputed the last derog on my report and now, 30 days later, it is gone. I filed a simple dispute with Equifax and the collection account is now gone!My EQ FICO score went from 688 to 791 overnight.

A collection account from a 6-year-old debt was added in July and made to look as if it were a new debt! My score dropped from 790 to 658 by adding this one account!

The CA is lucky they didnâ??t verify this one, I had excellent documentation going and a string of violations to nail them on if they had verified (failure to note the account as in dispute, no validation, continued collection activity after request of validation, reaging, wrong DOLA, wrong amount, wrong OC, they didnâ??t have ANYTHING right).

This board gave me the knowledge and the power to fix this BS by the CA.

Thanksâ?¦CreditNet.

JohnM

Ps My nomination for PBM for the 2003 Nobel Prize in Economics is on its way to Stockholm.

Pss Interesting sidebar, it is really called â??The Sveriges Riksbank (Bank of Sweden) Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobelâ?. It was NOT one of the five prize areas mentioned in Alfred Nobel's will. This prize for Economics was first awarded in 1969, the other Nobel Prizes were first awarded in 1901.

(the preceding was plagiarized from the website of the Noble e-Museum http://www.nobel.se/economics/prize-awarder/index.html

 

No...

This was CRS (Commercial Recovery Systems) they got the account from ACT (Automated Collection Technology) who got the account from HFC (Heady Financial Services) who got the account from HFC (Household Finance Corporation) who claimed they got the account from Signet Bank who was bought out by Wachovia Bank who says they have "no record" of this account.

Each of the WEASELS (ca's) folded when asked for proof of any debt. They sold it (which IS continued collection activity) in violation of the law. If I knew 5 years ago what I know now, I would have put a stop to this BS a long time ago.


JohnM

 

lyttlemac,

that is just my personal opinion.

in my research and reading for the last 18 months, , the resale issue has bothered me and i dont believe i have seen this issue addressed very many times.
i think a very strong arguement can be made that to sell a debt after failing to validate IS continued collection activity.

the very act of selling the account causes further collection activity. the CA's are wide open to a class action lawsuit that goes to the core of the debt resale market.

has anyone else seen any cases on this point?

JohnM

 

azur

thats OK because actually it was meant to be funny!

JohnM

 

I posted the original message in this thread last night right after I saw my EQ report online. Now, this morning, as I sit here with a major hangover from the binge of cheap wine, young women and fat cigars that followed my post, I think a further comment is needed.

My score really didnâ??t jump 120 +/- points in a day. The score did go up 120 points, but it took a few years of planning to make that happen. I found Credit Net in May of this year and this is post number 200 for me. I would estimate I have spent 30 minutes a day for the last 6 months working on my credit; I started on my own over 4 years ago to try and straighten up the mess. It really didnâ??t happen overnight.

So, if I made you think you can do this overnight I apologize because you cant do it overnight.



JohnM

��....or was it a binge of young wine, cheap cigars, and fat women? It hard to remember through this alcohol induced haze���.

 

jaye,

1- i went three years and didn't miss a payment
2- i disputed all lates (at this point they were all years old) they ALL came back as "never late".
3- the only really bad item(a CO) aged off of EQ and has become less important on the other two as it is now almost 5 years old.
3- i paid all my bills on time no matter what
4- i finally got that damm collection off my account
(i think the complaint to the Texas AG and the FTC may have helped)
5- i paid off all my debt. and vowed never to go back in debt again.


when i sobered up this morning, and realized that i implied it was done in a day, i was doing Credit Net a disservice by saying that. it takes time.

this is a great place to get the knowledge to allow you to fix the mistakes we make. the commitment to pay your bills on time has to come from within.

i wish you good luck in your journey and know you will be pleased with the results.


JohnM

 

Butch,

Actually I was reviewing the SOL provisions of the UCC last night. I have not found any additional help in the UCC yet, but I am still looking.

One comment on your letter regarding resale (which I had not seen before - very nice), the wording about validation by CA#2 could be changed a little. You suggested:

This seems to allow them (CA#2) the right to cure the violation by CA #1. It would be my position that only CA#1 can fix the violation and "unfreeze" the debt. I suggest this:

Any further collection activity or communication by you on this "frozen" account before I receive validation from (insert name of CA#1) is an additional violation of the FDCPA. This account should be returned to (insert name of CA#1) in order for them to provide me with the validation information I requested. Any further communications from you would constitute â?? further collection activityâ? and are barred by the FDCPA.

This wording points out that only CA#1 can cure the violation by CA#1 and any action by CA#2 is barred by the FDCPA

I had not seen your post on the subject and wondered if I was the only one to hold this opinion on "frozen" accounts.

Has anyone on the board sued a CA for selling a debt that is â??frozenâ?? I see it as a major vulnerability of the debt resale business.

JohnM