Harry Seaward

Moderators
  • Content Count

    5,918
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    154

Harry Seaward last won the day on November 13

Harry Seaward had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,288 Excellent

About Harry Seaward

  • Rank
    500 posts and hasn't been banned yet....

Profile Fields

  • Location
    Arizona

Recent Profile Visitors

4,588 profile views
  1. That would be me, but settling was never mentioned in any of your numerous threads that I participated in. My responses to your posts were formulated accordingly. Congrats on your settlement.
  2. I'm not 100% certain, but I don't believe an OC is bound to recognize a notice that you don't want them to call you anymore. That's certainly a part of the FDCPA, but again, OCs aren't governed by the FDCPA. It might be addressed in the TCPA, but it's been a long time since i read through that piece of legislation.
  3. How would you tell the OC not to call you in a dispute that you file with the CRA? It's really a moot point anyway because, as i said, they'll know you're not dead when they get the notice of your dispute.
  4. Incidentally, as part of the OCs investigation, i would expect them to reach out to you to verify that you are in fact still alive. If you ignore that contact, you have no right to sue them if they don't correct their entry on your credit reports. Although i suspect your dispute will be all they need to fix their mistake.
  5. Ok, so your issue is with the OC, then. Not the CA. You have to dispute the inaccurate info with the CRA. If it comes back verified, then you have an FCRA violation.
  6. Is the OC reporting you dead to the CRAs?
  7. First, whatever you theorize about what happened, you have to be able to prove. Second, in your scenario, there is no FDCPA violation anyway because it was the OC that nefariously hired the 'i see dead people' CA. OCs are not subject the three FDCPA. 'I see dead people' we're simply acting on what they were told by the OC, as would any debt collector. As you have been told previously, if you believe there is an FDCPA violation here, despite our insistence that there isn't, go ahead and sue the CA and you'll get an official answer. You can't sue the OC for an FDCPA violation, so they won't have to come up with any defense at all. They did nothing illegal.
  8. This is the case with any kind of debt. There's always room for error, but the debt collector has the right to rely on information provided to it by the creditor. Especially when the debtor does nothing to try to correct the information. Anyway, @WhoCares1000 is right. You need to make sure that the SSA don't have you in their system as deceased.
  9. This proves what i told you. The creditor placed the debt, either by mistake or actually believing you are dead, with these guys. They then sprang into action doing exactly what they specialize in doing. If this was Midland, i could see where you might have a point. Using your logic, it would be suspicious if a company named Insurance for an Insured Public tried to sell you insurance. What they do is right in the name.
  10. If they were referring to your "estate" when they called, they already had you down as deceased, probably because the creditor gave them your file that way by mistake. There's no logical reason to believe a debt collector would intentionally do this.
  11. I see this also, but it seems part of untreated grief is feeling victimized by everyone and everything. I appreciate that @WhoCares1000 said what needed to be said and I'm not making excuses for OP's rotten attitudes, but i think it's helpful for the rest of us to keep things in perspective because it explains why OP is acting like we're speaking to her in a foreign language.
  12. Start with a dispute with the CRAs first and see what comes back. The answers to all of your other questions will depend on how the CRAs respond to your dispute.
  13. Some JDBs have paid the initial fee, but they always dismiss when they get the $5,000 bill. You might have to put a little more time and effort into this, but no more money.
  14. I quoted the part of your post that said you weren't going to make it easy for them, and asked why. Why are you not going to make it easy on them? They are going to win anyway. What's the point of letting this consume you for the next 6-12 months? It serves no legitimate purpose at all.