Has any one here filed a lawsuit against an OC. My situation is this is a paid cc account with the OC. I have disputed the account because I felt that the account was not reporting correctly (closed by credit grantor) and of course, it is rife with lates (1-90, 3-60 and 3-30). I disputed the account with the OC twice..... I disputed with the CRA twice... I know the OC doesn't have to validate but they do have to mark account "in dispute"... they didn't. All I really want is deletion.... they have been served and the court date is Tuesday.... I can win even if they show up (DO I have damages,..... possibly) But I want to settle...... any suggestions ... I define the win by the deletion, not the cash!
What state are you in? Does your state allow for injunctive relief? If so, you might be able to persuade the judge to force them to stop reporting. -HDAlex
You did not identify your cause of action against the original creditor! Did you sue the original creditor because the OC failed to note that you disputed information? If so, then you are S-O-L (S - - t Outta Luck). Under the FCRA, the OC, as a "furnisher of information" is immune from liability for failure to note when the comsumer disputes information. That means a consumer cannot sue an OC ("furnisher of information") and recover damages for failing to note when the consumer disputes information. See 15 USC 1681s-2(c) and (d). You may have better luck suing the OC for defamation (libel). You would have to prove that the OC funished the CRA with false information. That you notified the OC that the information was false (i.e., put him on notice; disputed the false information). That after receiving the notice, the OC continued to furnish the information with "malice" or "willful intent to injure" you. See 15 USC 1681h(e).
jthoma, Sorry but you are misinformed, you CAN sue an OC for failure to list and communicate an account in dispute under FCRA 623, you cannot however sue an OC for subsection (a) of that statute, that subsection has to be enforced by federal or state authorities. The other subsections of that statute are fair game and fully enforceable by the consumer. I have sued plenty OC's for failure to communicate an account was in dispute by me, all have settled out of court. Tac
Now that has got to be the most fantastic way to get your mortgage paid off I ever heard tell of. Amazing! The lender just sent Joe Goodcredit a letter informing him that they have just accelerated his mortgage because he failed to meet the payments on time so all ole Joe has got to do is dispute with the credit bureaus claiming never late and the OC don't mark it in dispute. ole Joe files a suit on them for double the price of the house, claims they not only didn't mark it in dispute but his wife files a suit on them as well for alienation of affections. She claims poor ole Joe has been so distraught by all this illegal harrassment that he hasn't been any good in bed anymore so she wants a couple of million for alienation of affections. Absolutely brilliant. LOL
LOL!! Bill I don't know about paying off the house but....I have been able to have a few mortgage payments waived so to speak by the nice actions of some of my previous creditors. LOL!! I didn't even think about including the wife on this one, you bring up a good point although how can one prove damages for lack of nooky when one only gets it once a year?? LOL! Please advise Bill. Tac
well diva's dh is doing okay in that dept ;0 now, anyone care to assist me with this lawsuit on tuesday.....should i contact the oc today and offer a settlement?
I'm not a lawyer and I can't give you legal advice. I'm simply not qualifed nor a member of the bar. Sorry about that.
If they are serious, they will contact you today. That gives them until Monday to FedEx the check and any release documents. Should you contact them, it may appear that you are overly willing to settle. Keep up your poker face and prepare for court on Tuesday.
I have been contacted a day before by a defendant wanting to settle, if we can agree on something then what I will do is notify the court immediately and request a continuance because we are close to resolving the matter. The court never has a problem and usually defers it about 2 weeks which is plenty of time to sign a release and get your check in hand. Sometimes it takes about 5-7days for them to process the paperwork and get a check. This is done by the legal department of the company requesting an expense check be disbursed from the company to settle the matter. I have never had a defendant renig on an agreement but I did however get a release signed rather quickly to protect my intrests. Under no circumstances should one dismiss a suit based solely on a conversation and agreement with a defendant over the phone, once it is in writing then it is ok to dismiss w/prejudice....meaning you cannot file again. Again, I am no attorney but this is what I have learned based on my experience and research. Tac
Bill, I stand by my original statement ... That means a consumer cannot sue an OC ("furnisher of information") and recover damages for failing to note when the consumer disputes information. See 15 USC 1681s-2(c) and (d). Section 623(a)(3) [15 USC 1681s-2(a)(3)] describes one of the duties of a furnisher of information, as follows: (3) Duty to provide notice of dispute. If the completeness or accuracy of any information furnished by any person to any consumer reporting agency is disputed to such person by a consumer, the person may not furnish the information to any consumer reporting agency without notice that such information is disputed by the consumer. Section 623(c) and (d) [15 USC 1681s-2(c) and (d)] provide that there is no private cause of action for violation of Section 623(a)(3), as follows: (c) Limitation on liability. Sections 616 and 617 [§§ 1681n and 1681o] do not apply to any failure to comply with subsection (a), except as provided in section 621(c)(1)(B) [§ 1681s]. (d) Limitation on enforcement. Subsection (a) shall be enforced exclusively under section 621 [§ 1681s] by the Federal agencies and officials and the State officials identified in that section. Of course, anybody can sue anybody for anything. And lots of people do. However, their lawsuits are promptly dismissed for failure to state a cause of action. Sometimes, they are sanctioned for bringing a groundless action. I was just pointing out that there is NO CAUSE OF ACTION against an OC or furnisher of information based on a failure notify the CRA that an item of information is in dispute. A lawsuit based on this "cause of action" is subject to a prompt dismissal for failure to state a cause of action. However, the point is to get the OC to delete the derogatory information. If this type of lawsuit gets the matter settled with a deletion, then great. On the other hand, I believe that the consumer's bargaining position would be stronger if, under the facts and circumstances in question here, he pleaded a valid cause of action, such as defamation. Bill, can direct me to a specific section of the FCRA which gives a consumer a private right of action against an OC or "furnisher of information" for failing to notify a CRA that an item of information is disputed?
jthoma I was not replying to your post or your position at all. I was replying to tac's post and I said that I agree with him. I have no quarrel with your post at all. In fact I pretty well agree with that too.
Wasn't this the issue in Nelson vs Chase Manhattan Mortgage? An appeal court saying a consumer does have a right to take action against a reporter of incorrect information?
Well, hadn't thought about that at the spur of the moment but now that you mention it I think that is correct.
Yes , you are correct: Nelson V Chase - BK Reporting to CRAs http://216.239.57.100/search?q=cach...th/0015946p.pdf+nelson+v+chase&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
thank you..... duh. I have been around here long enough to know ... i should have thought about that! I still have to prove damages but I think i can do that!
