bellatragedia

Members
  • Content Count

    333
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10 Good

About bellatragedia

  • Rank
    Impressive 100+ postings

Profile Fields

  • Location
    Portland, Oregon
  1. I haven't inquired to see if Target will upgrade my guest card to a visa. I figured they would have to have a separate application as most places do that if you want a different type of card they offer. They started me off with a $200 limit when I first applied and had many negs on EQ still and my score was barely 600. After 6 months, they automatically raised my limit to $500. Most places will not do a CLI until at least the 6 month mark. Not saying all won't, but MOST won't, to keep in mind. I will check with Target and see if they are upgrading guest cards or if it's a separate app.
  2. Getting secured cards from your bank is a good idea too. After a year of good standing you can ask to be upgraded to regular, and now you have a regular bank CC. It's a good angle for getting better types of TL.
  3. That is surprising. The most I've gotten from them is mediation, and forwarding to the OC (well, it did get that junk Sherman off my report, I know).
  4. Thanks Sultan I'm going to attempt to look this over again tomorrow after the other million things I do...and then definitely the complaints are an easy first for it. That worked wonders with Sherman....I just want them off and soon. We want to buy a house really soon and I'm getting anxious with the CR's and the fact that all the houses we find are being built right now and soon to go up in price...see it's the pressure that's frying my brain. Okay, I'll look it over tomorrow and try to think straight about it. Thanks for the advice
  5. You mean won lawsuits? See the link below. http://debt-consolidation-credit-repair-service.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=12521
  6. MCK is the same company, but most of the reps at PG or vice versa hardly know the correct information for the company they do work for. I got the same thing today. At least it's currently still allowing daily monitoring by consumers.
  7. I was looking over the MOV section trying to see what I should put together. It mentions calling the OC and asking them what documentation they have proving that the account is yours, then if they say they have it, demanding they send it to you according to the new FACTA act. Can someone pinpoint where in the FACTA act it states that they have to send it to you? I was just talking with the OC for a CO that keeps coming back verified (on EQ & EX, TU deleted it a year ago), and the a$$ in recovery told me that if I hired a lawyer and I was stating "fraud" (I directly told him I wasn't making a claim to anything of the sort, and that I wanted documents) then the lawyer could request copies of my signed agreement, and other documents. I picked up on that and said "Oh so if I hire an attorney you will give them the documents that show this debt actually belongs to me?" Then he said that he didn't know, and that I would have to talk to someone else because he was in recovery. I was beginning to ask him to transfer me to someone who could help me, as he said "If that's all ma'am, thanks for calling, and have a good day!" CLICK. Besides hanging up on me he was very rude Basically, so if there is somewhere in the new FACTA where it states the OC HAS to give you supporting docs, then I want to know where to reference it because that would change things quite a bit. Does anyone know anything about this?
  8. Here it goes, and hopefully I can express myself clearly: This is in regards to two collections by Jefferson Capital. They are reporting collections on two different accounts (emerge & fingerhut) on all three CRA's for DH. I sent them a DV last month for both accounts (emerge & fingerhut). They received it, and did not validate or respond. They did not list the account in dispute on the CR's. They verified with each CRA on both accounts. First question, is this a violation for each account (2) on all (3) CRA's. That would be 6 (2 accounts on 3 bureaus). Or is it another number? Second question. Is this also a violation for each account on all three for them continuing collection activity (by verifying to the CRA) for each. That's another 6 then. Do I have these numbers all wrong? My brain feels fried and the children have been arguing all day today. I need claification on this because I think that I'm going to draft an ITS to Jefferson Capital and file complaints to the BBB & AG. Maybe I should take another route. I don't know. I'm feeling down and frazzled. Bleh. I want those accounts off his CR's. Jefferson isn't following rules and I need to do something about it. They were charged off in 5/2003.
  9. Yes breathing, thank you for clarifying my speech That, basically, is what I was saying.
  10. What I mean is a process server came to our house and "served" DH with the court filed paperwork that this attorney was filing a judgment against DH.
  11. Well I do need to look up the state statute, but the SOS office told me that if they are collecting as part of a case then they don't need to be. If they are collecting because they are assigned to it as a debt collector, and acting like any CA would, then they need to be. That was in my original post. My question was that if he's putting that line at the bottom of his letter, doesn't that make him sound like he is acting solely as a debt collector? Which then he'd need to be registered.
  12. Emailing with the SOS office in OR, I was asking about a certain attorney that is trying to collect a debt on a Cap 1 CO for DH. Last year, Arrow was assigned to the Cap1 CO. Arrow got sent a limited C&D in the DV. They sent a few more letters then gave up. Then DH gets a letter from an attorney stating that since DH C&D'd Cap1 (he only sent limited C&D to Arrow) said attorney would either be filing suit or recommend to his client to file suit. DH gets served with a judgement and decideds he doesn't want to go to court. I back off and tell him fine. Nothing comes of it, and nothing appears on his CR. One year later now same attorney sends out another dunning letter trying to collect on this debt. This goes on for two weeks and then I get a DV with limited C&D sent to the attorney. A week passes and after receiving a letter for three weeks in a row from them, then another letter comes. No validation, but clever as it is, it doesn't actually state that they are asking for payment, but more of just stating the debt and that their client (cap1) will be either suing or being told to go ahead and sue. It's as if they didn't receive my letter.... So now, I check with the SOS and he isn't registered here to collect. She does state though that if he's collecting because of a case then he doesn't need to be registered. My question: If he is putting that little line at the bottom of all his correspondence stating "this letter is from a debt collector, any information gathered will be....etc" then he is collecting on this account and therefore would need to be registered correct? The SOS suggested asking him if he's assigned to the case, and if he says yes to ask for his OR collection agency # knowing that he doesn't have one. Personally I don't know that calling him up would be best, but I want advice on what's what with attorney's acting as debt collectors and how you can tell if they do need to be licensed to do so.
  13. So right you are! Wonderful information too, thanks and have a great weekend as well Charles.
  14. I appreciate the advice Charles. That's pretty much what I realized we need to do at this point so it's not too depressing to hear it . Is it true that my scores won't matter since DH makes the most money?
  15. I don't know. Reinvestigation from what I can tell is always used to describe any investigation, not just one done after you dispute it the first time. My results always say reinvestigation regardless of whether it's my first dispute on that TL or my third. The FCRA seems to use that term to describe it. Look at this part: upon a request of a consumer that is made after receiving a consumer report under this subsection That part of it where I bolded: it says after receiving the report, not after filing the dispute. I need a FCRA lawyer sometimes I swear....