marianneliberte

Members
  • Content Count

    16
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About marianneliberte

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Fields

  • Location
    Texas

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. My Equifax credit report includes two entries that appear to be accurate in all ways but they include this inaccurate comment: "Payment is payroll deductible". Research elsewhere suggests that this indicates that my wages are being garnished in order to repay these two debts. That is not accurate. One account is closed but I make payments directly to the credit card company (Chase), and the other account was charged off and I make payments to the creditor's (Bank of America) collection agency. I was not sued by either company; with Chase I simply continued to make payments on their website, and with BoA I worked out a settlement agreement (with payment plan, no garnished wages/etc) with their agency. I tried Equifax's online dispute process. However, the comments listed in the dispute process do not display the comment "Payment is payroll deductible". That only appears to be on the actual credit report. 1) How does one dispute a false comment on a valid entry? 2) Elsewhere I've seen discussion of a false comment being potential cause for deletion of the entry (even if the rest of the entry is valid?) from a report. Is that accurate? If so, is it better to wait to dispute it until after the debt is paid in full? Thank you!
  2. This situation worked out, thankfully. I contacted the collections agency for the OC and asked whether a law suit had been filed. No suit has been filed. The Agreed Judgment was sent in error, and a new settlement agreement is being sent out. phew. Thanks, all!
  3. Yes, in a way. I spoke with the non-attorney who is the only type of representative working for the attorney with whom one can speak. I called the number provided by both the OC and the letter from the attorney, and the staff member to whom I was directed is not an attorney but works for them. Same office.
  4. That's what I'm figuring. Sigh. As for it being null and void or them not filing it; given the additional page that grants them a post-judgment of interest, I suspect they would file it in order to get that extra ~$750 of interest.
  5. Question: Is an Agreed Judgment necessary in this situation? I want to pay the full balance on a credit card debt. I received a notice of intent to file civil law suit from a collections attorney representing the Original and Current Creditor (same bank). I contacted them and over the phone discussed terms (a payment plan) and requested the paperwork for a settlement agreement of those terms. I received in the mail a 1) settlement agreement, and 2) an agreed judgment. They have asked me to sign both and return them. In the settlement agreement it says: "During the conversation, you expressed a desire to reach a settlement in this matter and stated that you would be willing to enter into a payment plan concerning the Account on the condition that (1) we enter into a signed settlement agreement, (2) you agree to a repayment plan, and (3) you consent to the entry of an Agreed Judgment. In exchange, we will agree not to pursue collection of the judgment as long as you make you agreed payments under the terms of this Settlement Agreement:" [and then it lists the repayment terms] At no point in the (legally recorded) conversations was an Agreed Judgment discussed. The Agreed Judgment includes an additional page, that states: "It is further ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the plaintiff Bank of America, N.A., is entitled to post-judgment interest on said judgment to be computed at the rate of 5.00% annum on the damage portion of the award, and at the rate of 5.% per annum as to all over amounts awarded herein, said interest to accrue as allowed by law from the date of this judgment until this judgment is satisfied." In the phone discussion, the representative specifically stated that they are not charging interest. I was informed when I originally called them that the law suit had been "printed", and that the next step would my being served. The validation documents and the above described documents were mailed to me. I want to sign a settlement agreement. I want and am prepared to repay this debt. I do not want to agree to a judgment against myself.
  6. I got the core answer I needed this time from the Bank. I wasn't permitted to speak to the legal department, but finally someone in the collections department was able to confirm that the OC still owns the account and that is has been placed with the agency/firm that contacted me stating their intent to file suit. I feel much more secure in knowing with whom I'm communicating now. Thank you both. Follow-up question (this should probably be in another forum, but I hesitate to open another thread): I've seen consistently in the forums that it's bad to agree to anything by phone with collections agencies, but that it's safer to work via phone with the OC. When it's a collections agency+law firm that is representing the OC, where does that fall on the phone/no-phone scale?
  7. Contacting the OC's legal department makes sense. I'll give them a call now. As for why I'd prefer to not let this go to court if I can help it: I cannot afford an attorney and to pay my debt. My job is too time-intensive to allow me to learn how to defend myself. I want to pay off my debt to the OC if possible and consider that a moral obligation if I have that option available to me still. But I don't want to pay the wrong party.
  8. Charged off in mid-2015. It does show a balance on my CR, under the OC's name. Good to know, thank you! So my next step is to try to get this resolved before it goes to court. They say they've already printed the suit. I don't know if I have a week to try to get a debt consolidation loan approved in order to accept the lump sum settlement or if I should agree to the monthly option. They're not willing to send me any settlement offers in the mail; only willing to mail a settlement agreement for me to sign. I've seen consistently in the forums that it's bad to agree to anything by phone with collections agencies, but that it's safer to work via phone with the OC. When it's a collections agency+law firm that is representing the OC, where does that fall on the phone/no-phone scale? I don't want to act out of fear; but I am afraid that they'll process the suit while I try to get a settlement or payment plan worked out.
  9. The bank was the OC. I think Card Services was the servicer. That the phone rep in the collections department of the bank wouldn't know -- OK. If that's possible, then that makes me feel a touch better about the weirdness of this. The OC reports this as a Charge-Off. This is not listed in the Collections section of the report. It's listed as Status: CHARGE-OFF, with the comment: Charged off account. Account closed by credit grantor.
  10. Question: Does it matter if the collections attorney is lying about who they represent if I know they now DO own the debt? Am I right that they own the debt? Texas resident. . I have two accounts in collections from 2013/14 when I was unemployed. I let my fear and shame rule me, so I did not talk to my creditors at the time, and have since then been at a complete loss as to how to proceed. I am now determined to get ahead of these. My finances are now back to where I can make payments. I have also applied for a Lending Club loan in order to pay all at once, but I don't think I will be approved for that because one of these two accounts (smaller one, different collector) is showing up as a collections item in my credit report. I received a letter from Scott & Associates last week that states a Notice of Intent to File Civil Law Suit for the $5000 debt (the larger of the two I owe, each from different credit cards). I called the OC bank and they confirmed the amount and that the debt had been charged off and the phone number for the new contact person matches the phone number in the letter. This is a collections attorney. I called them this morning to feel out where things stand. Status: They say they represent the OC bank, and that all money I pay to the collections firm will go back to the OC. They have added $80 in court fees to the original total, because they have already printed the suit. Next step is that I will be served with a suit. They say I cannot slow this process and they cannot say how much time I have before the suit is processed and signed by a judge. They have offered that I can pay 57% lump settlement pay-off, or a monthly amount towards the total debt. I called the OC bank to try to clarify. They confirm that the account was charged off to Trak America. The phone number they gave me does match the phone number in the letter. BUT, they are very clear that they do not own the debt, Scott & Associates does not represent them, and that money given to the collections firm will not go back to the OC bank. Questions: Are they misrepresenting themselves? Does it matter? Note: my top priority is preventing this from going to court. I recognize my debt to the original creditor and want to pay my debt. An affordable lumpsum settlement would be great, but paying off the total in a legit way is fine. As long as it's legit. Here is the text of the letter: --- Creditor: [Original creditor, a bank] Total Amount Owed: $5xxx.xx Our Account Number: [their own acct # for me] Dear Mr./Ms [last name], As you know, this law firm represents [PC] in connection with the Account. We have attempted to contact you regarding a possible resolution: unfortunately, we have either been unable to speak with you or we have spoken with you, but were unable to reach an agreement. As a result, WE HAVE DECIDED TO FILE A LAWSUIT AGAINST YOU. If we do not hear from you, the next correspondence you should expect to receive from us is a copy of the lawsuit. THIS MATTER CAN BE SETTLED! PLEASE DO NOT IGNORE THIS MATTER! Contact us to discuss settlement options. Sincerely, Scott & Associates, P.C. This account is issued and administered by [OC], successor in interest to [XXXX Card Services] * Please be aware that we are a debt collector attempting to collect a debt. Any information which you provide to this firm may be used by us for that purpose.* ---
  11. I chose to call them. They denied my 25% offer and ultimately made an offer of 57%. I have not yet agreed. I'm leaving this post open in case the phone call question is useful to someone else, although I'm past that point.
  12. Question: Can I call them to start the conversation and indicate that I want to settle? Understanding that all must be in writing from them before payment/etc. Texas resident. I am trying to figure out my best next steps. I have two accounts in collections from 2013/14 when I was unemployed. I let my fear and shame rule me, so I did not talk to my creditors at the time, and have since then been at a complete loss as to how to proceed. I am now determined to get ahead of these. My finances are now back to where I can make payments and can Dave Ramsey-style pay off all my credit card debt. I received a letter from a collections attorney firm last week that states a Notice of Intent to File Civil Law Suit for the $5000 debt. I called the OC and they confirmed the amount and that the debt had been charged off and the phone number for the new contact person matches the number in the letter. I see conflicting information here in the forums re: whether or not calling the CA is appropriate. I understand not making payment or trusting a deal until it's in writing. But my first priority is preventing a law suit. I do not deny the debt to the original creditor. I cannot afford an attorney to represent me in court. I would rather settle this before it gets to that stage. Can I call them to start the conversation and indicate that I want to settle?