Jump to content

jared_strauss

Members
  • Posts

    119
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Fields

  • Location
    OK

Recent Profile Visitors

471 profile views

jared_strauss's Achievements

Impressive 100+ postings

Impressive 100+ postings (5/6)

0

Reputation

  1. Th reason for the secured card? A third positive tradeline will benefit you further. In respect to why you may have to address the collections: it could be a condition in order to qualify. That's why I say to call 3 local mortgage brokers and inquire with them so you may find out for sure. I wouldn't assume that you would have to wait till 2016, unless you stick to your plan. Like I said, you may qualify much sooner than that. In respect to your current plan of attack, you may want to debate the fact that you could probably negotiate settlements on your own for 20 - 50% of what you owe. You may want to ask yourself if spending $1,100 - $2,750 to expedite your goal of buying a home is worth it (if it's a condition for qualification).... Also, I ran into an article today where there were some really insightful comments regarding personal experiences with rebuilding credit after bankruptcy. The article itself is a bit misinformative regarding the impact of a secured credit card, but the comments are worth the read... http://www.thestreet.com/story/11982768/1/three-big-donts-of-rebuilding-credit.html?puc=yahoo&cm_ven=YAHOO
  2. I just watched an amazing video of an FTC workshop that I think everyone here will enjoy... It can be viewed at - http://www.ftc.gov/video-library/index.php/ftc-events/life-of-a-debt:-data-integrity-in-debt-collection-part-4/2468007208001 (Willingtocope - there is an embed option on the video but it didn't embed correctly in the post here. Is there a way to make it work?) The first half of the video is relevant to debts that are within stats. The other half is dedicated to accounts that aren't. Lot's of insight here....
  3. You more than likely will need to address the "2 Collections from the CO one for 2k, the other for 3.5k" previous to applying. You'll probably qualify (credit-wise) for FHA within 12 months of doing so, possibly sooner. Also, please understand that it is very possible that your credit score will go down when you address those accounts initially, due to the recency of activity. If it does, it will generally rebound with time. You could also potentially accelerate the recovery of your credit score by acquiring a secured credit card. The increase won't be immediate when doing so, but should make a positive impact on your score after you've made on-time payments for 6 months. To maximize that increase, you'll want to be sure that your outstanding balance on the card doesn't exceed 10% of it's credit limit. If I were you, I would call 3 local mortgage brokers that specialize in FHA. Don't have them pull your credit, so that way you don't get dinged with inquires or alert your remaining delinquencies to the fact that you may be interested in buying a home. Instead, ask the mortgage brokers if you could provide a copy of your report to them so they may offer you a cursory review so you may become aware of specifically what they will require. If you do, please share your experience. It will be helpful to many.
  4. I just called Bank of Oklahoma to inquire on their FHA mortgage loans for consumers who have filed Chapter 7 bankruptcy. According to Ethan Wagner, who is a loan officer at BOK (who can be reached at 918-488-7112), generally speaking, to meet the definition of establishing new credit under FHA guidelines all you need is one credit card that has been opened and paid on for 6 months. He also indicated that a 640 credit score is required by his bank. Which he said is fairly easy to achieve for people in this situation. And are you ready for this? It doesn't matter if the reestablished credit is secured or unsecured. Capital One commonly extends credit to people who have recently filed Chapter 7. But, even if you don't qualify for their unsecured card, you could obtain their secured card and generally achieve the same result in regard to qualifying for a FHA mortgage 2 years after discharging a Chapter 7 bankruptcy.
  5. Did you watch the 2 minute video? Apparently not. Please do. And then you tell me...
  6. Like I said it was post # 47 in this thread - http://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/320644-pentagroup-ignored-dv-letter-in-march-now-sending-documents-in-june/page-3 You said it in reply to: "My situation is clear: the debt is 100% valid, the tacked on fees, maybe, can be arguable to a pointI had previously settled 3 other CC accounts that show as settled in some form or another on my CR. 2 other accounts (inc this one) show as unpaid for over a year and a half.I had spoken to the OC prior to charge off in an attempt to negotiate a settlement and was unable to secure one that was satisfactory to me based on funds available at the timeI have spoken a few times to the JDB (Portfolio Recovery Associates) briefly, once to tell them not to call me at work, and 2 other times to hear them out and also noted I'd like to settle but just didn't have funds at present. Last conversation was had Feb 2013They have since called my home incessantly and I never pickup. They have also sent a letter identifying the debt and offering an 80% "settlement" to clearLast contact came last week via mail, Second notice, being referred to the litigation dept but that no individual attorney has reviewed the case as of yet and they must hear from me by July 5th. This notice showed the correct OC, and debt Seller, as well as a balance (that included tacked on late fees, no itemization, just a number).I have been hemming and hawing about sending a DV precisely because of what Torden writes. Fact is, if I had funds, I'd push to settle for 20-40% right now, it is my debt after all. If my goal is to simply delay until I gather funds, but avoid risk of judgment and/or suit, what would best course be?" That description sounds just like "a person who found a JDB on his CR, and doesn't have any clue as to why the JDB is there." doesn't it?
  7. Really? What do you think prompted me to post here to begin with? This is my first post here (# 17) - http://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/320512-talked-to-collection-company-before-reading-how-to-handle/ And it had to do with what you claim you guys "never tell anyone". These adversarial moves are incited by the "staff" here constantly without consideration of the consumers goals or an explanation of any of the cons or possible reactions they may expose themselves to. Maybe if it's all lumped together you will see that... Willingtocope said - "Since the debt has been sold to a JDB, my personal advice is send them a "Cease and Desist" letter pointing out that you never did business with them and that they either need to prove otherwise or get off your credit reports, otherwise you'll be forced to pursue your legal options." Post 47 - http://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/320644-pentagroup-ignored-dv-letter-in-march-now-sending-documents-in-june/page-3 Admin said - "I'd send a DV just to see what they say. if they don't respond, then you can send a C&D letter." Post 58 - http://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/320644-pentagroup-ignored-dv-letter-in-march-now-sending-documents-in-june/page-3 Admin said - "@sundevilatx - You need to make this request in writing and tell them that all calls are inconvenient." Post 16 - http://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/320512-talked-to-collection-company-before-reading-how-to-handle/ Tomntex said - "Our goal here is to help each member resolve their problems. Most of the time that means as a Pro se fighting for themselfs. We do not in MOST cases advocate paying these leeches, but to sue them and win." Post 23 - http://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/320512-talked-to-collection-company-before-reading-how-to-handle/page-2 Willingtocope said - "If you have the full amount Crap 1 says you owe, call them back and tell them it is your personal policy NOT to deal with collection agencies and if they want paid, they'll deal with you directly or take you to court and you'll let the judge decide..." Post 25 - http://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/320512-talked-to-collection-company-before-reading-how-to-handle/page-2 And all of these are stated just in the threads I've participated in. Not including this one!!! Now here is something interesting that also doesn't line up with your claim BV - First off, in this video the Admin states that a consumer should first look into bankruptcy. Which is excellent advice! But it totally contradicts her own statement in this thread that "bankruptcy should be the last resort." Why the change of heart Admin? Your advice about looking into bankruptcy first was spot on!!! What else I found interesting is that she also gave great advice about looking into hardship programs or raising funds to settle quickly. But what's really disturbing is that she then states: "if you can't settle with the credit card companies directly then you just don't pay your bills..." Instead of paying them, she says "when the accounts go to a collection agency you should just request validation on them and if they can't provide validation that the CA's will just leave you alone. And in the event that they can validate the debt, you can write them to tell them they can stop calling you." All of these things sure as hell sound like you guys are telling people to send cease and desist letters on debts that are within SOL. Anyway, I just have to say that most of this exchange has been ridiculous. Look at that first post I linked above. Look how you guys reacted to my post. I couldn't have delivered that information in a more friendly and delicate way and I was pounced on immediately and its never stopped. And all I was trying to do was to help you guys with some insider information that consumers should be aware about. Some of you still think I'm posting for a self-serving agenda. It's paranoia at its best. And to be perfectly clear - I don't take issue with sending debt validation letters (on valid debts) or cease and desist letters. I would never do it for myself. And I certainly wouldn't recommend the approach to anyone who wanted to resolve their debt. But to each their own. My entire point is to just accompany the advice with an explanation of the cons when delivering it. That's it. The recent links that you guys have posted give excellent purpose to your boards existence. But, they have absolutely nothing to do with what I have been conveying. If a consumer feels their debt isn't valid then they should send a debt validation letter. I've never said otherwise and I've been more than clear about that. My responses are only relevant to the consumer who feels their debts are valid.
  8. First of all.... wow! PC thank you for taking the time. That was really kind of you to share your info. Although, I have learned over the last few weeks that they're not interested in it. Which is unfortunate. Willing, do you ever take off the tin foil hat? I mean seriously... you're doing it again. Except now you are insinuating that I'm posing as people. You know what cracks me up the most... is that most of the "staff" here paints debt collectors in this evil light and makes consumers think that if they verbally communicate with one that they'll be "abused". When in reality, you guys act no different than how you portray them. And Willing, just so you know, I may be back tomorrow if I can find the time... but if I'm not and someone else that actually knows what they're talking about happens to comment on this thread.... it's not me... kthx
  9. Admin, as I outlined in one of my first posts on this site, the JDB rarely gets any documentation when they buy the accounts. In most circumstances, the information they receive is via an Excel spreadsheet and it's data only. In most circumstances (probably 95% of the time), statements, affidavits, and original credit apps must be ordered by the JDB. I'll be back in couple days to respond to the rest...
  10. That's not what I meant when I asked "which is it". Admin said: "If a JDB sues you, you can beat them in court." I've read many replies on here that imply that JDB's can't get the documentation. Heck, one on your administrator's - Willingtocope - even tells people "JDBs almost never have any legitimate documentation that the alleged debt is valid." and "And, never send money to a CA or JDB unless ordered to by a court." On a side note: how radical of a perspective is this? So I'm better off exposing myself to a potential judgment, court costs, back interest, and attorneys fees instead of financially addressing my collection accounts before hand? But, you say: "This is especially true in courts where judges are require very little from JDBs to prove their cases." Do you not see the inconsistencies here? So like I said: which is it? She did? Where? You guys are avoiding these questions like the plague. I'll ask again... How is it in the consumers best interest to potentially prepare a collection entity, that is well known to litigate more commonly than others, with the documentation they would need to successfully obtain a judgement? Isn't the consumer better off if they're sued when Midland doesn't have the documentation? Also, you're making the assumption that when a CA or JDB receives a validation request that the CA or JDB will just print off the account information and mail it to the consumer to meet the requirements of the letter. What you're failing to understand is that a debt validation letter signals that the account may not be collected through voluntary channels and if payment arrangements aren't entered into in a timely manner it potentially causes a need to make the request for additional documentation from the original creditor in an effort to collect the account. Again, think logically - if you were a business owner and you had a client that was past due on their account with you, and you received a validation request from them and you replied to it, and then failed to make arrangements after the fact (that impasse thingy I've been talking about), then, you, the business owner, is left thinking that in order to collect you may need to pursue the account legally. BV, you clearly haven't been reading my comments correctly. This comment is based on situations where the consumer hasn't been sued and they would rather not increase their chances of being sued. Maybe you just don't get this but most people would prefer to avoid being sued. • Debt validation letters on valid debts • Cease and desist letters • Hiring a long-term debt settlement company that communicates with their creditors prior to possessing the financial ability to settle The above 3 things are considered adversarial by the collection industry and should be avoided if you're a consumer who wishes to minimize their risks previous to resolving your debts. This comment has to do with a situation when the consumer is already being sued. And, it's relative to filing an answer not sending a debt validation letter on a valid debt. In my opinion, this stage of collection is when you start to fight and make them prove their case: if you're smart. Requesting validation previous to this time (when an account is with a non-local CA, JDB or attorney) potentially prepares them for if/when they do. How is it not stupid to invite the collector, that has the right to sue you, to get the documentation they would need to sue you, prior to suing you? Especially when Debtzapper is pointing to substantiation that indicates that they sue without it? Again, Isn't the consumer better off if they're sued when Midland doesn't have the documentation? This comment is when the account is with a collection agency. Again, not a situation to where it would be in a consumers best interest to enter themselves into an adversarial situation. Unlike the majority of advice that I've read on these boards my advice isn't broad or general. I actually take the specific goals and situations into consideration. The whole point of me offering this information to begin with was because I was concerned with the broad advice to send debt validation (on valid debts) and cease and desist letters without becoming aware of the consumers goals or disclosing the possible risks. At first I assumed that you guys just didn't know about these possible risks so I figured you would appreciate the information. However, since you have already stated that you agree that these reactions that I have elaborated on in this thread are possible and you continue to refuse to disclose them when offering the recommendation of sending a debt validation or cease and desist letter, I don't know what to think. The tone of this thread is unfortunate. I was hoping that you guys would have an open-mind and be receptive to this information. But instead, it's just been one big pissing match. I didn't post here for that. I came on here polite as I could possibly be and offered an educated opinion that is based on my lengthy experience. You guys have said yourselves that you lack any experience on the collection side of the fence, I figured you would have welcomed the information that is based on my experience in the industry. Yet, all you guys have been doing is dodging questions, likening me to con-artists, insinuating that my information is biased, and deflecting away from the main point I've been making which is: If you're going to encourage people to send a debt validation (on a valid debt) or a cease and desist letter, please disclose the possible reactions that may be created from your advice. And I may be asking for too much with this, but maybe you could think about inquiring on their goals while you're at it. And by the way, I still haven't received a reply to my question about how this site is compensated. So, I'll ask again: how is this site compensated? Does it generate revenue from situations where consumers send debt validation letters on valid debts or cease and desist letters?
  11. Debtzapper that is just ridiculous. I'll ask again... How is it in the consumers best interest to potentially prepare a collection entity, that is well known to litigate more commonly than others, with the documentation they would need to successfully obtain a judgement? Isn't the consumer better off if they're sued when Midland doesn't have the documentation? These questions are relevant considering that they're the reason and cause for my statement. Answer them. If anything, you're the one making false implications due to the impression that you're creating by insinuating that they LITIGATE EVERY ACCOUNT. Again, that is not true, sir. And, again, it would be the only way your argument would make any bit of sense.
  12. Please explain to me how we're not on the same page. I really would like to understand the point you're trying to make. How does that case reflect that there isn't increased risk when sending a debt validation letter on a valid debt? Because they'll sue regardless? And if so, are you saying that they sue every account? Because again, that would be the only way that a debt validation letter on a valid debt wouldn't have an impact on the probabilities. Do you disagree with that? From what I gathered from your response, this is my response: the fact that Midland sues when they lack the proof to sue has nothing to do with the probabilities of being sued. The information that Debtzapper is referring to doesn't indicate the frequency or concentration of suits. It only indicates that they are known to sue without it. Again, they do not sue every account. If that isn't what you mean, please elaborate.
  13. In most circumstances the collection agency will generally make the recommendation to the original creditor since they're the ones that acquired the information necessary to make the recommendation. Then, you're right, the original creditor makes the final call when placing it with a local collection attorney. Most collection agencies don't actually sue accounts themselves. In the JDB situation: the JDB generally won't be spending any money on the validation until they have exceeded a 10% threshold on the portfolio. As that is pretty standard for most debt purchasing agreements. In the event that they have exceed the 10% threshold: if the consumer is collectable, either by wage garnishment of through a lien on a home, the cost of the validation will likely not deter them. Why would a JDB be less likely to pursue litigation with no documentation when you have already demonstrated that you're likely to fight it when you sent the debt validation letter to begin with? BV80 said "This is especially true in courts where judges are require very little from JDBs to prove their cases. Part of that is based upon precedent and another part is based on the "good ol' boy system"." So I'll ask you like I did her, which is it? Furthermore, how can you say that? What if the collection agency makes a request for the statements or the original credit app after they receive the DV request? I always did. In fact, it was the fist thing that I did.
  14. By the way, here are the historical interest rates for FHA mortgages - http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/documents/huddoc?id=fharates_current.pdf You'll notice that in 2013 it's 3.53%. Although, that rate has obviously risen in the last couple of weeks like the conventional rate has. But as you can see, they're fairly consistent with each other. And as far as down payments go: they're 3.5%. See - http://www.zillow.com/mortgage-rates/finding-the-right-loan/fha-loan/
×
×
  • Create New...