• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Ahntara

  1. Apples and oranges. The original loan amount is a footnote in trying to (re)finance the balance of what is owed. Original loan was 110k You're currently seeking 88k Lenders will look at the improved DTI & LTV ratios but won't really care about how much you paid down a previous lender.
  2. These vendors have done a good job at creating consumer demand for something worthless. Just want you to know, you don't have a score. It's a calculation that is performed when you or someone else requests it. Pay me $30 and I'll work up some numbers for you too. Each aspect of the lending industry has a score (never available to consumers) that is skewed to their industry. If you're going to obtain a loan, especially the expensive stuff like a mortgage or auto loan, then it behooves you to know an approximate score and get it as high as possible. But to just watch it? Dude, sp
  3. Had to edit like crazy to understand but think I'm following you now. 1) Original HSBC collection/charge off account 2) sold or transferred to Calvary 3) Lawsuit filed but dismissed These are three separate aspects. They would rightfully show as three different entries, now two since the suit was disposed of in your favor. Thinking that you can deal with one and that all others would automatically be included is customary. But the lawyer you engaged did what you paid him for, he got the lawsuit dismissed. There is no reasonable expectation that he would know to cover t
  4. Long time to go with no response here. But I'm thinking it's the lack of data here. You need to specifically list what is showing and all the details of HOW it displays. Is this showing on a merged credit report? It could be that one bureau shows the lien filling and another shows the release. Ideally, this should display as one item with both the paid date and the disposition (which is a Release of Lien). Think of the Release as a divorce decree. It's a separate legal item and should be recorded in public records as well. But for the disposition to show as a separate item is n
  5. If you have access to mortgage paperwork, refer to it for more clarification. It's comprised of two (primary) components, a deed which grants you rights to the property and the mortgage note which is a lien. Mortgage lenders want their lien to be exclusive. Consumers have gotten 80/20 mortgage loans. It's a tactic used in the big-scam days prior to 2008 that allowed consumers to obtain loans when they didn't have the 20% down payment. So the 80% LTV note (lien) would be in first position when recorded, the 20% in second position, both secured by one piece of real estate. For the mortgage
  6. Do you own a home currently or are you planning on obtaining a mortgage loan in the next 10 years? Judgments appear on your credit report because of the impact they have on real property. In the few seconds between a deed and lien being recorded, a pre-existing judgment will attach to property in first position. Obviously, mortgage lenders want not only first lien position but prefer to have nothing else secondary to their interests as well. Additional liens can make foreclosure difficult, costly or impossible. So it's really NOT in your best interests to have judgment removed fr
  7. We all hope to find the pot o' gold at the end of the credit repair rainbow. If this agency actually fulfills this promise, hooray! A a few things to be aware of... As stated above, collectors are notorious for lying to get paid. Data is furnished electronically and most have no knowledge nor access to change this. The only thing a collection agency is required to do is to update the balance. The update is what causes your credit score to lower by making the account appear to be more recent to the scoring software. Be aware that Data Furnishers have contractual agreements with the CR
  8. There is misleading information in this thread, but it's not coming from me. "...The length of time information remains in your credit file is shown below... Public Records Judgments remain on file for seven years from the date filed, whether satisfied (paid) or not..." That statement was pasted from www.equifax.com in response to the question "How long do you keep my credit information?" I could go through the trouble of finding and pasting info from TU & EX, and the FTC as well. But that's a waste of time and moot at this point anyway. You all know those sites, and should read them &am
  9. iza, ask your processor to seek an 'exception' to having this changed or removed from your CR. It's no more material to the loan you seek than it is to the TL itself.
  10. Hmm, yea, it's a law. I was discussing the prevailing actions of the CRA's. But feel free to argue semantics. If the word 'universally' gets your drawers twisted, consider it changed to 'routinely'. The CRA's routinely, frequently, IMO suppress PR's after 7 years from date of entry. YMMV
  11. "...if the court has found...credit report should reflect..." I agree that it should. I'm stating that they haven't, currently or in the past, IMO and experience. Hence the advice given right here on this forum, repeatedly. "...when discussing matters of law..." That comment didn't relate to 'matters of law'. I was pointing out SOP for the CRA's in relation to RP time limts. I think we can all agree that the CRA's occasionally fail to act according to the law.
  12. I am listening or, more accurately, reading. But you're not. I wrote that they "...May appear..." But they won't appear, especially if challenged as obsolete, as in (specifically) older than 7 years from 'date of entry'. The CRA's will universally suppress an older TL and an older judgment. As for the example, I hope it works out for you. But my 3+ decades of experience with the CRA's have shown me that all listings over 7, 7.5 & 10 years (where applicable) are easily suppressed with an 'obsolete' dispute. I've personally gotten unpaid tax liens suppressed off of CR's with simple 'obso
  13. Sorry, but I'm not. I know how the statute reads. And I did point out that they MAY appear as long as they are valid under state law. The reality is that CRA's use the simple time limtis set out in that passage. Judgments appear for 7 years from 'date of entry'. Anyone wanting to confirm this need only read the text on a CR, look at any CRA website or the FTC's website itself. Judgment aren't 'reported'. They are picked up from Public Records. We've discussed how they end up on CR's many times. The only decisions as to how long they appear are made at the CRA's themselves. They suppres
  14. Did you check the score range? It's been a long time since I've seen them, but I remember that they started/stopped at different places (350 verses 400). That alone could account for the difference.
  15. You can insist on this as long as you wish. Judgments don't remain on CR's for over 7 years per the FCRA. Even though state laws MAY trump that time period. The federal law is what the CRA's use. To indicate otherwise is misleading.
  16. If a consumer moves out of FL, or one of the other states wherein this is applicable, and doesn't move back, the SOL runs out at normal expiration. The consumer might be sued under their new state's law, or under prevailing state law listed in the contract or account agreement.
  17. Don't be sorry...you're in the learning curve. SOL has little bearing on collection efforts. It's about being sued and the ramifications. Collection efforts can continue pretty much indefinitely, unless you're in one of the 2 states which also have a Statute of Repose. California isn't one of those states. SOR details that once SOL has expired - the debt is extinguished. THAT stops collection efforts, along with paying the underlying debt. The expiration of SOL also doesn't guarantee you won't be sued. You would have to go to court and raise the post-SOL defense. "...Isn't reporting...a
  18. Sounds like a good idea, but if we're knocking at the door of Congress - there's other stuff with much higher priority.
  19. Apples and oranges. SOL is state law which details the time period a valid lawsuit may be filed to recover money owed and lays out the ramifications, which may include wage garnishment, bank account/asset seizure and liens against real property. It varies by location and by account type. There are actions a consumer can take which may reset SOL. You need to become familar with your state's law to find out what those are. I've never heard that disputing is one of those, but you should find out for sure in your specific case. SOL has little bearing on credit reporting. Reporting Period is d
  20. You may wish to take RN's advice and not 'open the door' but definitely pull your head up out of the sand. "...can't put it on my CR..." Wrong. It can go on your CR as a tradeline. If the Medical Service Provider sues and gets another judgment, the matter multiplies and becomes two derogatory items - one in the TL's and one in the Public Records section. That's twice the damage. "...neither...signed any paperwork agreeing to be financially responsible..." That doesn't matter. If he received treatment, even 'ordered' treatment, he is liable. And apparently, in your state, as his spouse - s
  21. I second the thought to find a different lender. I realize that's probably easier said than done especially in today's volatile financial climate. But the comment your current lender dislikes is one of status and shouldn't impact their underwriting.
  22. TU, right? Call them and ask if they have historical info in their database. Tell them that you have proof of illegal reaging (you may wish to read the FCRA 1681c, Subsection 605 to inform yourself prior to this phonecall). If it were me, I'd record it. They may see the 'error' and correct it. If not, get the specifics and build your case. It does appear as if your rights have been violated.
  23. Read the FCRA, particularly the part they quoted to you. It calls for the consumer to send the very items they requested. "...cut and paste..." I agree. Send them a copy of what they have reported. Decline to send any additional info; although you can't fault them for wanting to verify that you are, indeed, you. You may wish to redact your DL or include the info on your letterhead.
  24. "...a form that asks for..." They want proof that you are who you say you are. Since you've already provided this, resend it. You may, or may not, wish to point out that it was included in your initial letter. "...provide...appropriate documentation to support your dispute..." Per 1681s-2, Subsection 623(a)(8) of the FCRA. You'll see this referred to here as a '623 letter' or method. "(D) SUBMITTING A NOTICE OF DISPUTE- A consumer who seeks to dispute the accuracy of information shall provide a dispute notice directly to such person at the address specified by the person for such notices th