Forum
|
|
Forum
|
     | Wednesday, January 03, 2001 - 07:18 pm  I need your Help Guys! Listen to this one. Checked credit reports from two of the CRA's this past November. Found some routine inconsistancies concerning my chapter 7 from 96 that I need to work on. I also found a negative item from a company called Capital Loans dated 4/2000. I never heard of this company.. I sat back for a long time to try to remember Capital Loans and couldn't. Ok on the other report there was a listing for a company called PROCOLLECT c/o Capital loans also dated 4/2000. The report that had the Capital loans entry was the QSPACE (piece of sh*t) Equifax report. There is NO information to allow me to find this company(Capital Loans). I email QSPACE and they say they couldn't help me. Ok so I looked up PROCOLLECT. Typed there name in a search engine and found them in an instant. Called them up.. there first rep told me that the account is from 1995 and she told me some information about myself and where I use to live. It was all true information. I asked her could I have some information on CAPITAL LOANS. She said she couldn't give me any. I tried to track down Capital Loans again... couldn't. Called back Procollect and spoke to another genius. She told me if I wrote her should could send me information about Capital Loans. It's been over a month since I wrote, I don't think I'm getting any information. I don't just say this because I've gotten no letter but also because when I called them to try to get any information they weren't really attentive to anything but me giving them my correct address and my (bogus) employer. After they got that information attitudes changed. The second rep told me that they have the owner of Capital Loans listed in a city in Texas. I called directory assistance and they gave me a number to a bussiness called Capital Loans that operates all over Texas. They confirmed I didn't have an account with them and they don't use a company called PROCOLLECT (also based in TX) to do collections for them. So these people are not the ones I'm looking for. If this account is in fact mine it can only be this one company I included in the Chapter 7 (similiar amounts) that may have changed owners and names. In anycase they are dead wrong for reporting 4/2000 as the date on the credit report! Should I contact Equifax and ask them how to get in contact with Capital Loans. The other report Procellect is on is an Experian. How should I find this company!! Help guys.
|
| | Thursday, January 04, 2001 - 08:12 am Do not bother asking any credit bureau to contact any creditor. And do not bother calling the creditors unless you are considering paying it. First of all Cap. Loan may not even be in business anymore. Disputing it may make it go away. In addition, Cap. Loan probably redated the loan before selling it Procollect. This has happened to me before. Look at your account numbers on each account. There is a chance it can be the same. If it is or if it is even close, send a copy of something / anything with the original account number on it. Send a copy of the credit report, with the similar number highlighted. Then explain in an attached letter the flow of the account from the BK account to the current claimant. Explain that the date is not correct and that it should be 'included in bankruptcy'. Since, my BK was in '92, I managed to get two items removed that way. One was difficult and I did have to get the creditor involved and faxed them a copy of the BK. The other was simply not responded to by the company. You may have to live with a '96 date, but it is better than a '00 date. And if they don't respond to the dispute then so much the better. Good Luck.
|
| | Thursday, January 04, 2001 - 10:21 am Don Thanks for your prompt response. I just called Procollect and asked them where is my letter on the information about CAPITAL LOANS. They told me that they don't even collect for them anymore... but they would except a payment and clear the credit bureau account. What kinda BS is this! I told him that the date on the credit bureau entry was 4/2000. The rep says to me, I know. So this looks intentional on there part. So how should I dispute these entries. Again they are on two different reports. Capital loans is on Equifax $113 dated 4/2000. Procollect is on Experian $113 dated 4/2000. All I know is that this account is from sometime in 1995. I could be satisfied with them changing the listings just to reflect 1995. That would make them drop in 2002. SOL's are already pass on them. How should I word my letters to the CRA's?
|
| | Thursday, January 04, 2001 - 12:40 pm Just say that they are not your accounts and see what happens. Procollect says they don't do business with Capial Loans anymore so I would think that one would go away. If Equifax has as much trouble as you in trying to get ahold of Capital Loans then they'll probably delete it.
|
| | Thursday, January 04, 2001 - 02:05 pm I'd say, just dispute those accounts with ALL bureaus (including Trans Union unless you KNOW it's not on their report.) I'd write "(creditor name) is not my account or it is one of the accounts discharged in bankruptcy that was later sold for collection. Please either DELETE the account or CHANGE the DATE to the discharge date of (whatever month)/1996 and report it as included in bankruptcy." That should cover all possibilities, and if they VERIFY the account, go straight to small claims court or hire a lawyer to sue. You've already wasted way too much time on this.
|
| | Thursday, January 04, 2001 - 05:19 pm Your key to this whole matter is a very narrow view of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Fair Credit Reporting Act. You should begin by writing dispute letters both to the creditor and to the credit repositories involved. There are several lines of attack to employ. First of all when a collection agency receives a debt to collect they should, within 5 days, provide you with written notice of the debt. You have 30 days from that written notice to dispute the debt. They cannot contact you after that until or unless they provide you with proof of the debt (such as a promissory note or a bill showing payment due). Have they done all that? Have you disputed the bill? Have they provided you proof? The Fair Credit Reporting Act was modified in 1997 to require a creditor reporting to document the original date of delinquency within 90 days of placing the debt on your credit profile. Have they documented the original date of delinquency? What date did they claim the account originally became delinquent? Modifications were made in 1999 to the Fair Credit Reporting Act requiring a creditor to provide notification to a debtor within 30 days of placing derogatory information on the consumer's credit profile. The recommended verbage is along the lines of: "In the event you fail to perform your obligations under this agreement negative information may be reported to one or more credit bureaus." Did they provide you this notice no later than 5/31/2000? Chances are excellent that they missed one or more of these crucial steps. If so you have legitimate reason to argue for removal and expect from them that they start providing you the notices required by law.
|
| | Friday, January 05, 2001 - 06:32 am Thanks Everyone for your help. Christine it seems that I am going to write and dispute both of the items as you instructed. Shylock I never received any of that required information that you listed. NONE of it. The way I found out about these accounts was scanning the two credit reports. I think more people need to know about these procesdures you listed. I just disputed some items with Experian so let me wait for that report to come back and then I'll work on these two. The other day I was just thinking about how I messed up in two ways. First I didn't send the dispute letter certified or return receipt. I think it has been 30 days!!! So first I can't remember and second they could cheat me on the 30 day turn around. Also I was thinking that between the Thanksgiving and Christmas Holidays would be a GREAT time to dispute items. We know how we are all at work after Turkey Day and we know what all of our minds are on before Christmas. Plus aren't we all filled with such joy at this wonderful time of the year. This may be a great time to redispute things you disputed before. I should have used this time for all my disputes... oh well. Also my girlfriend just informed me the other day that one of her temporary jobs two years ago was with the local TU office here in town. She said that all of the reps were on the take and you could easily delete anything you wanted. WOW this is something to think about.
|
| | Friday, January 05, 2001 - 07:51 am Don't lose too much sleep over the 30 days. Since they can re-insert it after that period anyway (provided they notified you they did). Also if some reason it does come back as verified, don't be afraid to dispute it again at a later date. All they can do is throw it out as frivolous. Cleaning up some items on my report has taken several disputes. I've even had one comeback as 'verified' and when I called the company to tell them it was included in my BK. They said that they never even received the dispute from the credit bureau asking for verification. But how can you tell who is lying. Just keep hammering at it.
|
| | Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 02:17 pm Update guys. I got a letter from Procollect today! They are removing the entry.. but only after my amatuer letter. Amatuer but straight to the point and it worked! This was my biggest problem. Well I guess I can just dispute Capital Loans and see if it will come back. It's on Equifax. Check out my letter guys. Also I'm not seeking a mortgage loan (read the letter) I just put it in there to show them I'm serious and they could be liable for some sort of serious credit denial since they knowingly posted a 4/2000 activity date on this collection though they say it's from 1995. Actually I think they are the reason one of my cards haven't increased in limit. Oh well there soon to be OFF!! Dear Sir Or Madam, I am writing to request that the annotation for the collection be removed or corrected on specifically my Experian and any other credit reports. I first contacted your office in early December after pulling an Experian credit report and seeing a listing for a collection in the amount of $113 from an original creditor name CAPITAL LOANS. I called your office to verify this debt because I had no recollection of doing business with a company called CAPITAL LOANS. The representative, Ms. P******* could only tell me over the phone that the company was based in Rowlett, TX and the debt was from 1995. After an extensive search I was unable to find this company. I was able to locate a company called Capital Loans that operates in several cities in TX. They verified that I did not owe them anything but the manager said that he does not use Procollect for collections. It was obvious that this is not the company. I called your office back and spoke to Ms. P*******, I told her that it was very important that I get this information fixed because I will be seeking a mortgage loan in the near future and this inaccurate “recent” derogatory information on my report is hurting my chances. Ms. P****** said that she could only give me more information if I wrote her a letter stating that I wanted more information. I wrote and sent that letter in early December. After getting no response after a month I called your office the first week of January and spoke to a gentleman that stated that your company does not collect for a Capital Loans anymore. I advised him that I wanted some information on Capital Loans so I could verify the debt. I told him that if the debt could not be verified I wanted it removed from my credit report. If the debt could be verified then I would like the date annotated correctly. It is currently annotated as 4/2000. According to Ms. P*******s this account is from 1995. The gentleman talked to a supervisor and called me back (I gave him my number). He stated that all he could do is to collect the amount which could in-turn fix the credit report. I told him that I had no intentions paying a debt that you could not verify was mine. I ended the conversation there so I could further communicated with your company in writing. This letter is my request for your company to either remove your entry from any and all credit reports or verify the debt in writing and correctly annotate any and all credit reports with the correct dates. A continued unwillingness to comply with my request is a violation of The Fair Credit Reporting Act. On the first of March 2001 I will pull reports from the Three Major Credit Reporting Agencies (Experian, Equifax, and Trans Union). By that time if I have not received any correspondence from you and the credit reports are still reflecting the unverifiable collection entry I will file a complaint with the FTC and get my attorney to prepare a civil suit against you for damages under the laws of the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
|
| | Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 03:40 pm Great! Now make sure you hang on to their letter, you never know when that collection shows up again. And I wished you got paid for the hours you worked on that.
|
| | Wednesday, January 17, 2001 - 09:22 am Ok Another Update guys... This is my week! I got Experian (disputed) back. They changed everything I asked them to. All my derogatories except two will be off in 2002. Thats next year!!! My Chapter 7 will be off 2006. I have 11 accounts in good standing. I plan on giving disputing (with Experian) a rest for now but I'd like to get rid of one and fix another in say six months. Ok I had a signature loan with a Bank in 95. In January 2001 is when I filed chapter 7. Experian has the drop date as 3-2003. Which means they had to report once AFTER my Chapter 7. (3/1996) 6+7=3 as in 2003. I should dispute this "date" right? When disputeing should I give them a date it should be? I don't know it but I can give a good guestimate. It should be back in 1995 like the rest of my delinquancies therefore falling off in 2002. Ok The other one is a Citibank Visa for $3272. It's joint with my mother. It was paid by mom in 1997. Medical problems forced her into some financial binds. It's now listed as "Paid/Account Charged off" whatever the hell that means. The drop date is 4/2004. Ok heres my gripe. When my mother initially got this card I was a minor (17). I think she just got "a" card for me (authorized user) when I turned 18 and was going off to college. They have it listed as Joint. I remember talking to some really not so nice people in there collection department in 1995. I tried to get them to take me off the account then, explaining to them that I never signed anything. Well nothing got resolved then, I was not equiped with the right knowledge or enough tact to deal with the situation. At that time I asked my mother did I sign anything for the card. She couldn't remember, I'm sure I didn't. Since the date is correct I'd like to dispute this as not a joint account. Does it matter if I was an autorized user? There has to be some distinction between the two. How should I go about this?
|
| | Wednesday, January 17, 2001 - 09:35 am I think the Citibank issue is an easy case for you since they cannot prove joint status (because they HAVE to provide a signature to keep you as joint) and since there is obvious damage to your credit. I would write them (not collections, but the customer assitance unit) and demand that if they cannot send you a copy of your signature on a joint application that they must delete your name from the account and the record from your credit reports. I had to do the same thing with another card issuer and they removed me a month after I complained to several supervisors. If they don't respond, get an attorney to write them saying the same thing. If you sue them, I bet you could show damages from the CRA listing and get money on top of the deletion.
|
| | Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 05:39 am Shulamite. Ok so I should write a letter to Citibank asking for verification or them to remove the entry. Like you restated it is paid so I guess I may catch a break. Does anyone know the legal differences of Authorized users and Joint account holders? There has to be a distinct legal difference somewhere. Where I am getting at is I was probably put as an authorized user on this card. So if it comes back like that whats my defense?
|
| | Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 04:24 am When I filed my BK, I did in on myself without including my wife. She was an authorized user for my Citibank. Similarly she was listed as a joint account on her credit reports. When I started cleaning up our reports, I disputed her entry with the CRAs and had them totally remove that listing from her files. It worked with all three. I wouldn't bother dealing with Citibank yet. Dispute it first and see what happens.
|
| | Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 10:47 am Amistad, If you are joint, you share *one* account number with someone, which legally must appear on both reports, and which you are responsible for the debt. If you are AU, you have a *separate* account number from the primary, only your account number should appear on your credit report (not the primary's), and you are not responsible for the debt. You should pursue it with the Citibank customer assistance unit, because they cannot produce a signed application (or telephone memo) by you. There's no way they can legally make you responsible for a debt that you did not agree to. If (and when) Citibank changes it to AU, then they still cannot report your mom's account number on your report (unless she used the card with your account number). I just did this with Discover. They could not produce the signed application or a telephone memo, so they took me from joint to AU. I told them I did not want to be AU, and they took me off the account altogether. The rep said that even if I remained AU, my mom's account number should have never been on my report. So, now I have a letter from Discover deleting the account from my reports. AU is good for people trying to rebuild credit, but it can backfire, since companies often list the wrong AU account numbers on the wrong credit reports and if your primary abuses credit, you can easily catch the bad rating. (I had this happen with AMEX as well when I was AU with my mom). And then, as you see, they can change you to joint without your knowledge (illegal, but maybe they figured they could collect from you, if your mom showed signs of trouble.) I don't do AU anymore for that reason. Dispute it with Citibank, not the CRA. They'll take it off in a heartbeat, b/c they would never survive a lawsuit. shulamite
|
| | Friday, January 19, 2001 - 07:58 am Don, I hear what you are saying. I just want to give disputing with at least Experian a rest for now. If I remember right Citibank is reporting on Equifax also. I don't think I've ever had a Trans Union report. (I requested Equifax and Trans Union last week to scrub). So trying Citibank may kill all birds.... If that doesn't work I can get them with disputes since I do have at least one more I am going to pursuit around May or so Shulamite, Different account numbers and different liabilities is what I thought! Thanks! Is this under the FCRA? I'm asking because I want to know how to word my letter to Citibank. I don't think that they can produce a joint application. The one person at Citibank that said she would send one never did, back in 95. Right now I can't get MOM's reports to see what account # they list. She has some things she's dealing with right now and I don't want to bother her with this. I just also want to say to everyone on this board (that doesn't already know this). Leave those online Credit Reports Alone! Experian has a good system but since you have to click hyperlinks to see extended information they are impossible to print in a fully intelligable manner. My paper Experian report had a wealth of information on 6 pages. It would have taken at least 20 printed pages for the online report to give me less information. QSPACE is a joke, leave them alone at all cost. Wait for your paper report in the mail and order it straight from the source. Check to see if your state requires them to give you a free report. My state allow 2 per year!
|
| | Friday, January 19, 2001 - 02:34 am If you are AU, you have a *separate* account number from the primary, only your account number should appear on your credit report (not the primary's), and you are not responsible for the debt. " Not necessarily true. Some companies use different numbers on the CARDS that they issue, but that doesn't matter - it all points back to the same ACCOUNT number. An AU is someone who's authorized to use the primary's account, and the primary is responsible for any and all transactions that the AU makes, period. If they had a separate ACCOUNT number for the AU, then it would be a totally separate deal, and the AU would, essentially, be a primary for HIS account. Also, in some states, it doesn't matter whether it's joint, AU or even if the person isn't on the account at all -- if they're married, the spouse can be held liable for any of the other spouse's accounts. And then, as you see, they can change you to joint without your knowledge As you said, this is ILLEGAL. In our situation, we wanted to add a spouse onto two existing credit card accounts as joint. We had to jump through hoops, sign and mail TWO forms (each) back and forth, and eventually everything was worked out. But, as always, YMMV.
|
| | Saturday, January 20, 2001 - 05:02 pm Another Update Guys. (This info might prove useful) No Questions here. I received Equifax today. (A paper report direct from them) Back in November I purchased a QSPACE report and it pulled Equifax. Well the two reports are like night and day. The QSPACE report is full of whitespace, while the report I received today was compact but comprehensive. The most notable difference is this report has mailing addresses and Tel#'s on every entry that could be deemed negative. This is a lifesaver if you want to get in contact with the company. A seperate entry for CAPITAL LOANS, the company I was trying to get in touch with (and never have) IS NOT on this report. They were on the QSPACE report! On this Equifax report CAPITAL LOANS is listed as the original creditor under PROCOLLECT's entry. After looking at both reports I see that QSPACE itself generated a seperate entry for CAPITAL LOANS for it's print out. I can tell because I have another entry for a Collection Agency where QSPACE made it's own seperate entry for the original debt. AARRRGGG! This Equifax report only has two previous addresses for me, Experian has about 12! Most of those are interpolations of the same 4 addresses and a couple of PO BOX's. I have an AR inquiry for the AT&T BASE SCORE PROJECT (2/24/00) ... Ahhh I guess I was apart of some experiment. I will be disputing only 1 item on this credit report. They have the same item listed twice with different account numbers. All negatives will fall off by 10/2002 except the Chapter 7. CITIBANK VISA (read previous post) shows as a PAID CHARGE OFF here, but will fall off 5/2001. Thats close enough not to dispute. So I'll be writing CITIBANK to kill the Experian entry and TU (if they are there). TU is still on the way. I must note that this report came to me only 10 days after writing for it though I must add I'm in the same state as Equifax.
|
| | Saturday, January 20, 2001 - 08:36 pm Yes, very useful info. I am truly sorry I ever had the Qspace ad here.
|
| | Saturday, January 20, 2001 - 11:37 pm Amistad: Just one footnote for you! You may want to contact the credit bureaus about the date on your Citibank account. If the reported "off date" or "removal date" is 5/01 I would contact someone at the bureaus on 2/01/01 and ask to have it removed. They can (and I can say from personal knowledge that all three CRAs do) remove derogs 3 months prior to their removal date if you simply call and ask. In my case I had contacts at all 3 CRAs and called on the 1st of the month (if it fell on a workday) exactly 3 months early. Everything was removed every time it was appropriate. I was actually told about this from a worker at Equifax during a dispute. She did it for me at that time and I subsequently did it on my own with Experian and Trans Union. It is worth a try for sure and who knows you just may get out a little earlier. Frank
|
| | Monday, January 22, 2001 - 02:16 am You bet. They even removed my CH 13 BK a month and a half early ... 
|
| | Friday, January 26, 2001 - 03:04 pm Update Guys, I got my Trans Union report today. Here goes. The report itself is no frills. It's printed on regular typing paper with no pretty logo's or preprinted codes. Basically the thing looks like it came out of a typewritter, thats how basic the typeset is. What needs work... Routine "not included in CH 7", student loan is not showing paid (its paid), PROCOLLECT is there (but should drop by FEB). This report is only 4 pages but is the hardest to read out of the three because everything is the same size font. Equifax uses a chart and Experian goes as far as a chart and plain english (exmpl. "This item is scheduled to continue on record until 1-2003"). TU also list there dates as UPDATED, OPENED and CLOSED (if closed). It took me awhile to understand them and let me tell you'll why. I have an Entry with the annotation "INCLUDED IN BNKRPCY" however it has a UPDATED (DATE) of 11/2000 and a CLOSED DATE of 5/2000. Now I filed CH 7 in 1996. So this company is still updating after bankruptcy???? TU is allowing them to do this despite the annotation "INCLUDED IN BANKRUPTCY" Duuuh!!! My dispute letter will be in the mail on MONDAY. I do have the most positive accounts on this CR. All my usuals plus a CITIBANK student loan, it actaully was delinqunt for about a year before paid. The have it as PAID and always ontime. The same for another account too. I have a positive AMEX entry that was my mothers, I was a authorized user on that account too. It went into default with her medical problems, I cotested the entry on my report in 1995 with AMEX and they closed my account with an "Account Relationship Terminated" entry with ALL positive annotations. I got soft "NAME AND ADDRESS and LIMITED INFORMATION" inquirys from a bunch of Insurance companies. CUNA MUTUAL, AVANTA, PRUDENTIAL, FIREMANS, PROGRESSIVE and GEICO. Hard inquiry's from my Apartment Complex (just rented 12/00) and Capital One 11/12/99(I accepted mail offer then). Capital one has been doing MONTHLY AR's on Equifax though. Once I get some entry's disputed with dates, I'm possibly looking at all bad entries (except ch 7) falling off 1/2003. With EXPERIAN and EQUIFAX LATE/2002. Thats not so bad expecially since Frank said you can possibly get them to remove things three months in advance by requesting.
|
| | Monday, February 05, 2001 - 04:13 pm Update Guys, Today CITIBANK sent a letter in response to my letter saying that they have sent corrected information to all the CRA's to delete the accounts from my credit reports!!! Why do people hire Junum and Lex for these things. Ok I can't remove a bankruptcy like Lex... hmmm. The significance of this whole action was that CITIBANK was going to be on there the longest of all my derogs!
|
Credit Forum CreditCourt Forum 2003 Credit Suit CreditFactors Order Credit Reports |