Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by myscoresawful

  1. I would not be able to sleep at night if I didn't receive a statement with a current loan balance after making my payments each month. I suppose I may just be a stickler for 24/7 accuracy because I've been burned before, but really glad to hear that everything worked out for you, in your favor!
  2. From what I've read on the consumer section of the FTC website, the IDTA (Identity Theft Victim's Complaint & Affidavit) does not impose these requirements on the CRAs, but the IDTA and an "Identity Theft Report" (a report by your local Law Enforcement agency) does. It's really the ITR that makes the CRAs move, block, delete, etc and is probably why EX requested it. You may see them come back in time without the ITR, because the IDTA, when sent to the CRAs alone, is for disputing. Whether they pop back up or not might depend on how recent these accounts are, or if you get them the ITR. Here is the official form and information about it: https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/pdf-0094-identity-theft-affidavit.pdf If you scroll down to page 5 of that form, you'll see what I mean. I have never had to file anything like it (thankfully!) so I can't speak from experience.
  3. Please read posts thoroughly before accusing someone of not elaborating enough, or in the very least, make sure that you read it well enough to know that the advice you're giving is relevant. One more thing, don't give advice you aren't familiar with. I mean, why, (WHY?!) would you advise someone to file bankruptcy to include loans that aren't even due yet? (regardless of whether they can or can't be included).
  4. SOL in Oklahoma: Written Contracts: (most things like credit cards, installment loans such as mortgage and auto loans, etc) have a 5 year SOL, so any debt that you became deqlinquent on as of say June 2010, is now past the SOL and you can not be sued (or as I said before, if you are served on a debt that is past the SOL, you need to show up in court and simply tell the judge that it is past the SOL). Oral Contracts: (can vary in definition, but most things not covered under the Written Contracts) hold a 3 year SOL
  5. @billran ok, now I see that you are in OK. Let me see what I can find for SOL, etc and come back to this. Hang in there!
  6. I will try and help you any way I can. I have had to deal with student loans and by the way it sounds, you are in fine shape there. They're not due to start pay back until August, so no way they're reporting negatives yet. We'll try and prevent that. There are many things you can do and if these are federal student loans, I PROMISE you the lender will bend over backwards to help you as long as you STAY IN CONTACT with them.
  7. Depending on how long ago those lates were and how old these SLs are, you might see your score drop instead of increase if they just disappeared. They may be doing more positive for your length of credit history (or AAoA ) than any bad those lates may be doing if they're not too recent.
  8. The creditor doesn't have to validate, period. None of these things that you've 'copied & pasted' here, apply to the creditor. These only apply to 3rd party collection agencies. I would like to think that is what you meant to say, but in dealing with laws and violations, you need to be sure and use the correct terminology.
  9. Gotcha. Well what if you have good reason to do it that way? For example I'm severely hearing impaired (medically documented as disabling) and I always put in my request for validation "please make all further communication by USPS instead of telephone due to my severe hearing impairment"
  10. I know this is a little old, but I wanted to update this post since all of the info is here. Back in February I disputed all 3 as obsolete and 2 disappeared, but the biggest one ($1400) was verified by the CA and updated. I knew it was a bill from 2007 and no way they could legally be reporting it so I let the dust settle while working on some other things and then about 2 weeks ago I sent them a request for validation based on my rights under the Texas Finance Code. The thing is, I really wanted them to look at what they had instead of just updating with out checking their files, so that they would SEE that it was outdated. Anyway, I got a letter today and enclosed was a copy of the letter I had sent them, plus a short note from them stating that "This is not an attempt to collect a debt. Per your request, this account that you dispute, has been closed and will be deleted from your tradelines." So there you have it. It was only reporting to one bureau though, but it's gone.
  11. I'm looking at my receipt from the most recent item I sent CMRR and it comes to $6.49. (It's broken down on the receipt as follows): First Class Mail Letter: .49 Certified: $3.30 Return receipt: $2.70 It also gives the date of expected delivery which is 3 days from the date on this receipt. On the other hand, if your letter contained several copies of documents and weighed a little more, it might go up a little, but I can't imagine it weighing enough to come out to $9 bucks. Did you choose any other options? (such as Registered or Priority? Is that what you mean by 2-3 business day, 'Priority mail'? If so, certified gets there usually just as fast).
  12. 1. was there anything else in the letter that would define 'pre-approved', such as an explanation farther down with the * referencing it? The thing that would concern me is that it seems too much like the CC offers we get in the mail stating we've been pre-approved for $1500.00, then you submit the application only to realize that you are either denied, or approved for something like $300.00. It would concern me that they would come back and say 'well yeah, WE pre-approved you, but the OC (or debt owner) wouldn't after we gave them your payment". Then you would still be liable for the remainder. It happens. 2. What documents did they provide you with? Do you feel that those documents validate that you owe this? In other words, if it went to court, do you feel a judge would rule in their favor based on these documents? I don't have to tell you that you're playing with fire when it comes to such a large amount of debt, that is still within the SOL. Good luck!
  13. Unless things have changed that I'm not aware of, all they have to show is that they have the means in place to send this letter out (and I believe show that the letter was generated to send to you within the time frame). There is a possibility that the letter was sent and the US Postal service delivered it to the wrong address or just misplaced it. What I would do: I would send them a request for debt validation (CMRR) explaining that you have received verbal contact from them but have not received anything from them by mail advising you of your rights and opportunity to have this debt validated and that this letter is their notice of that and you expect validation within 30 days, etc. You can also put them on notice in the letter that all correspondence is to be done by mail from now on and no further phone calls.
  14. I don't think there is anything specific about demanding a company validate an inquiry within any amount of time. In a court, I believe they would only have to prove that someone logged on to one of their websites and entered the SSN into the application through a SSL protected website. (If that is how their name came to show up under inquiries). I have always don what the lawyer is suggesting. I dispute them with the CRA and usually they're deleted.
  15. They may not accept those arrangements, but they can't turn down any money you send them. I had a friend several years ago who was pretty broke and had a ton of medical bills from when she was getting cancer treatment. She was paying several different offices and CAs. During all of this she had a CA send her the 30 day notice for yet another medical bill and she sent them $5.00 (genuinely and all she could send). They sent it back to her with a letter stating they would not accept anything less than X amount of $ and then they tried to hard ball her by suing. She showed up in court (something I'm sure they didn't expect) and when the judge asked her if she owed it, she said yes. He asked her if there was a reason why she hadn't paid it and she told him about all of her other bills and how she had sent the $5 but they returned it and said they wouldn't accept it and showed him the letter. The judge looked at the lawyer for the CA an said, you know what this means, right? (The judge ruled in my friends favor and made the hospital eat the debt.. and it was over $17K). What I'm trying to say is that they may still sue you, but if you send them money, they can't refuse to accept it on a medical debt. (incidentally, this was a court in TN)
  16. For the past year, I've only had one credit card reporting ($500 cl) and I began paying it off each month a few months ago. The first month I did, my FICO8 score jumped 27 pts. (there were no other changes). This month, (out of curiosity, and with nerves of steel), I maxed it out and paid the minimum just to see what it would do and I got a notification that the balance changed on one of my accounts and a score change. It was that card reporting, and it was a 31 pt drop in my score. I've already paid the card off and I really don't use it except for a tank of gas each month to keep it active, so I will see when it reports in May what happens when it shows a 3% usage again. (of course there may be a difference in 'carrying' a high usage and only having it maxed for one month?)
  17. Neither really. How this appears to potential lenders who actually see a copy of your report is that you don't manage available credit very well because it looks like maybe the minimum payment is all that you can afford to pay to pay down your debt (and that is exactly what a balance on a credit card is,.. it's debt). Where as Sally Credit appears to be staying well within her financial means because she's showing that the her available credit is not so much that it becomes a long term debt. See, when you carry a high balance on your available credit month after month, it accumulates interest. Even if you pay that interest each month, the fact that you're allowing your self to be charged interest instead of paying your balance off each month and *saving* yourself additional debt and to some lenders (and scoring models), it seems irresponsible. Your debt to income ration can be so low that paying off this balance every month is a piece of cake for you to do, but the fact that you're choosing not to, is what doesn't seem like responsible debt management. Sally may be working a second job in order to be able to pay her balances off each month, but she's saving money by not accruing interest. I do know that the FICO8 (newest scoring model) really puts a lot of weight on the low balances. (I've tested it)
  18. Not if I'm understanding the OP correctly. He's upset because he's going to have to pay interest on the loans now that they've been moved from the 'In School Deferment' as opposed to not paying interest if they had stayed in the Deferment status. The only time a student loan doesn't accrue interest while in deferment, is if they are a federal subsidized loan. But a federal subsidized loan is not subject to any SOL. I believe that's what was in GDayMateAZ's favor. His loan was a private loan and not backed by a Guarantor. (just an educated guess here because Melkite hasn't replied lately)
  19. Look at both of the letters you have received. Take a magnifying glass if you have to (because that's usually just how well camouflaged the disclaimer is). What you're looking for is something with regards to them not being able to sue you or report you (to that effect) because of the age of the debt. A scammer's letter isn't going to have that, but any CA who is trying to keep their nose just above violations usually have it (maybe tiny print) somewhere on the notice (check the back). I have gotten several of these lately on very old debts and it took me about the 3rd or 4th time I read it, to notice the disclaimer.
  20. When you called the number, did you get the name of the CA? If it's not being reported by a CA, then it may either be in Cap1's in house collection department, or it's been assigned to a CA who is, for what ever reason, not reporting it yet. Either of those and you may still be able to keep it off of your credit report. It sounds like the DOLA isn't even 18 months yet, so you're going to want to approach anything about this debt carefully.
  21. Glad to hear you're having some success with correcting inaccuracies on your report. Just a word to the wise, these may only be 'temporary' deletions. There is nothing stopping them from correcting anything that may have been inaccurate and then reporting it again. I'm not trying to be a wet blanket, but you could see that score nose dive in the near future if these debts were not out of SOL. Just saying, if that's the case, you may want to be thinking of a back up plan such as taking care of them before they've had a chance to show up again. I know of many situations where this has happen. Capital One. Do you know for sure that Capital one 'sold' your debt to MidFund? If they no longer own the debt, about all they can do is report it as a charge off with a zero balance and MidFund could report a balance. It's been my first hand personal experience that Capital One is one of the most forgiving lenders on the planet, but they usually sue before they sell something for cents on the dollar. Make sure you know for sure who you owe. Good luck
  22. We all wish that this was true. Like Clydesmom stated, they don't have to provide you with all of that. If you try bullying them with tactics like this, they will know that you're not familiar with any of the regulations governing collections and will play hardball with you. As for them having no intentions of suing you because they haven't done it yet, that is the worst frame of mind you can put yourself in when dealing with collection agencies. They wait to the last minute to sue because it provides them the longest amount of time to collect on a debt. Let's say they've been reporting a debt of yours for the past 3 years and 6 months to the credit bureaus and they have 6 more months before the SOL runs out and they can no longer legally collect. Within the next 6 months they can sue you for that debt (before the SOL runs out) and if they win, it can be reported to the credit bureaus for another 7+ years. As it stands now, you're looking at maybe another 3 years on your report (if they don't sue or if you pay the debt), if they get a judgement before the SOL runs out, it would be another 7+. I'm not sure where you're getting your information about what they can and can't do, but please do yourself a favor and know what you're dealing with before you actually make things worse. You came here and ask for our help and advice, and we're more than happy to help if we can.
  23. I believe people need to understand how ChexSystems works, including how they affect a bank's decision in denying your application for a checking account. I recently applied for a checking account with a large financial institution (I'm purposely leaving out their name because they were 1) good enough to be honest with me, and 2) Who they are is actually irrelevant with regards to this topic), and was declined. In the denial email, it has the usual verbiage about how they made their decision based on a number of factors, including information received from ChexSystems, a "Consumer Reporting Agency", "based on your checking activity", etc and that, "while ChexSystems was not involved in our decision, we recommend getting in touch with them within the next 60 days".. "for a free copy of your banking history". I immediately went to the ChexSystems website and ordered a copy of the complete report because I KNEW I have NOTHING derogatory going on with ANY bank. About a week later I received my ChexSystems report that confirmed this. So I contacted the financial institution asking them what was the reason(s) that I was declined since there is NO negative banking history on my CS report and they replied with the following: Dear MyScoresAwful, We understand your disappointment in not receiving a (financial institutions name) Checking account after applying on April 9, 2015. As we mentioned, during our review of your application, we gathered information about you from a variety of sources, including ChexSystems. ChexSystems is a consumer reporting agency used by a number of banks that looks at information related to your past checking account activity to assign a risk score. The primary reason we declined your application was due to your ChexSystems score of 553 (on a scale from 100 - 899), which we consider to be a higher risk score. According to ChexSystems, the primary reasons for your current score are: · TIME SINCE NON-DDA INQUIRY ACTIVITY· CURRENT ADDRESS CHANGE HISTORY· NO EVIDENCE OF ASSET OWNERSHIP· NON-DDA INQUIRY OR RETAIL ITEM HISTORY While we ultimately made the decision to decline your application, ChexSystems produces the score and the reasons above, and we don't get to see how they are determined. It's also possible your score was affected by other reasons in addition to the items above. We recommend that you reach out to ChexSystems, using the above score and reasons, and ask for a more detailed explanation of the score and the factors affecting it. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Ok, so let me break this down:* TIME SINCE NON-DDA INQUIRY ACTIVITYand* NON-DDA INQUIRY OR RETAIL ITEM HISTORY In case you're wondering, I was told that a NON-DDA INQUIRY is an inquiry for reasons other than opening a Deposit Account. There is ONE (1) showing on the report and it is by one of the auto loan lenders that the dealership submitted my application to last month. (THIS is part of my 'banking history, how?? And how does this inquiry deem me a risk for a checking account?) * CURRENT ADDRESS CHANGE HISTORYIt shows reports that I've had 4 different addresses for the past 60 months. Two of them are the same address, but one has the wrong apartment number. One of them is also a PO BOX that I have had, and still have, and will continue to keep so that all of my important mail correspondence is more likely to get to me. I have moved TWICE in the past 5 years. Again, this makes me a risk or shows anything to do with my 'banking history'? * NO EVIDENCE OF ASSET OWNERSHIP (ok this one really had my neck turning red!) I found this section on the ChexSystems report and it's titled:"Additional information may be provided to Chex Systems, Inc. by Lexis-Nexis Risk Solutions Bureau LLC. The most recent information ChexSystems received fro Lexis-Nexis Risk Solution Bureau LLC relative to you is listed below, .." (and here is the listing under that): Number of address changes reported in the last 12 months: 1Number of address changes reported in the last 60 months: 4Total number of properties owned: 0 Wealth Index: 0 (Based on watercraft, aircraft, and property asset records - 0 = no information on file. 1-very low evidence of wealth to 6- very high evidence of wealth)Total number of non-derogatory records: 5Total number of derogatory public records (felonies, liens, bankruptcies and evictions): 0Total number of lien records (both filed and released): 0Total number of released liens: 0Total number of bankruptcy filings: 0Total number of felonies: 0Total number of evictions: 0 That's IT! In other words, it appears that anyone who doesn't own any assets (specifically, a boat, an airplane, or 'property' (property isn't defined, but I do have a home (paid for) in my name that Lexis-Nexis sends me a statement about it's value every year, so not sure why it wasn't 'reported' by them? It's value is only about $60K))... or has moved more than once in the past 5 years (regardless of your reasons why, it clearly shows that it wasn't due to eviction),... or if someone pulls your CS report for any reason other than opening a checking account, then you're seen as high risk with a low score. Someone please help me make sense of this. It states this report and score is suppose to be based on my "Banking History" but I fail to see where any of these (considered negative) indicators have anything to do with that? The only reason that I applied for a new checking account is because my CU doesn't do VA loans and I am planning to buy a home in the next 2 years and would like to use a lender I'm already established with. (I did find a well suited national bank for that who opened one without any problems). (As for contacting ChexSystems and 'updating' my information such as the home that is on file with LN, I won't be doing that. I strongly feel that, giving these people any more information about me would be like handing them a loaded weapon. I already have monitoring with the 3 biggies, I am not going to start kneeling to ChexSystems over keeping my information up to date in their incompetent score modelling reports). ~jumps off my soap box~
  24. Absolutely! All other things considered, I was told by my own CU, the fact that I had no recent auto loan activity was the only thing going against me for an auto loan. And yes, I did get financed, but the interest rate is anything but favorable, but they told me I could refinance for a lower one after I have had this one for a year or so.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.