nrgins

Members
  • Content Count

    416
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by nrgins

  1. I've been monitoring my credit score through Credit Karma for some time, and they focus on revolving credit balance compared to credit limit, number of inquiries, negative marks, etc. Today, I looked at my FICO score (Score 9) through Wells Fargo, which uses Experian. Along with the basic stuff, one of the negative factors they cited was: "Too many consumer finance company accounts." I'd never heard of that before! I'd heard, of course, that revolving balances can affect your score; but I never heard that having too many consumer finance company accounts can affect your score. By "consumer finance company accounts," I assume they mean store credit cards, since I don't have any finance company loans. So that doesn't make sense. Why would having too many store credit cards be a negative, if the balances aren't high? On the other hand, I do have a loan from "Lending Club," and another one from "Marcus Loans" (a subsidiary of Goldman Sachs). Could that be what is meant by "Consumer Finance Company Accounts"? Thanks!
  2. I am talking about whether they SOLD the debt or still own it, that's all. If they sold the debt to a JDB, then it's no longer theirs.
  3. OK, that makes sense -- provided they haven't written off the debt.
  4. Yes, he had insurance at the time. But, since the doctor wrote off the debt, and it's now in the hands of a collection agency, wouldn't that not apply anymore, since it wouldn't be the doctor giving him the "discount"?
  5. I'm sure he'd rather get a PFD, even if it means paying the full amount. I mean, it's only $800, and the debt is only a year old. Would definitely be worth it. Any advice on getting a PFD?
  6. My son (an adult) owed $800 to a doctor's office which he didn't pay because at the time he thought it was an unfair charge. He didn't realize it would go on his credit report, etc. The debt was sent to a collection agency for payment, and now he wants to pay it so that at least his credit report will show that it was paid, even though it will still be a black mark on his credit report for some time. (The debt is only 1 year old.) I was wondering if a CA would be willing to accept a smaller payment in exchange for the debt being paid in one payment. Would be interested in people's opinions about whether this would be possible; what amounts they might accept; and any tips for how to negotiate with collection agencies. Also, is it possible to have the collection agency remove it from his credit report altogether in exchange for payment? Thanks!
  7. OK, thanks for the clarification. I thought that since the SOL for lawsuits begins again when you make a payment to the collection agency, that the same would be true for the 7 year reporting period. I realize that the ORIGINAL debt would fall off after 7 years regardless. But I thought the collection account would remain for 7 years from the date of the last activity to the collection agency. But I guess that's not the case.
  8. Actually, if he pays them it'll be on his account for 7 more years, since the 7-year clock starts on the date of last activity, and the payoff would be the last activity. So he'd actually be adding 5 more years to the item staying on his credit report.
  9. I called the Hardship department of all my credit cards years ago when I was going through a hard time. They didn't close the account. What they did was they allowed me to make lower monthly payments for six months. That helped a lot.
  10. OK, just got off the phone with them. Turns out it was just a computer thing. A few years back I got a partial deferment on the account, allowing me to me a smaller monthly payment for several months when I was having some financial difficulty. As a result of that, the loan now went past the original closing date (4 years from start date), so their computer system "closed out the account," and shows the full amount due. I spoke with the branch manager, and she said not to worry about what the computer shows, to just continue to make the monthly payment until it's paid off. She said normally they'd refinance it for the amount that's left; but because I got the deferment, they can't refinance it. I did ask her specifically about the acceleration, if that had happened, and she said, "Oh no, trust me, you'd know if we accelerated your account. That's more of a legal thing, and you would know well in advance. But you're only past due for May, so, no, we didn't do that." So, all's well that ends well, it seems. Thanks a lot for your assistance. Even if it turned out to not be the acceleration thing, it was still helpful to have some idea about what it might have been. Thanks!
  11. I believe there was some listing of collateral, such as furniture and appliances, etc. But they're not a lienholder on my vehicle or anything. In any case, my concern is either: a) getting it worked out with them, or b ) paying it before it negatively affects my credit report. I don't think it'll come to collections either way. But I'm concerned about it affecting my credit report and how long I have to pay it before it does, assuming they accelerated the loan. And does a loan acceleration, in and of itself, negatively affect one's credit report?
  12. I'm pretty sure I don't have the original documents. Not sure what my options are at this point except just to pay the full balance before it's 30 days past due? And even if they enacted the "acceleration clause", it had to have been recently, since my last statement from them showed everything was fine. So wouldn't I have 30 days from the time the acceleration clause is enacted, since I'm currently current on the loan? Thanks!
  13. It's not an auto loan. It's a personal loan. My only concern is the effect on my credit report.
  14. I took out a loan with CitiFinancial (now One Main Financial) 4 years ago, with payments of $175/mo. There were only about 4 payments left on the loan. However, I have been late with each payment the past few months, paying each about 3 weeks past the due date (which incurred late fees, which they deducted from my payment). I have never been 30 days late with a payment, and have made all payments. Last night I logged into my account to make a payment (for the payment that was due in May), and, instead of showing me a total due of $350 (May's past-due payment plus the currently-due June payment), it showed me a total due of $676, which is the balance of the loan. It also showed a Past Due amount of $676, with a Past Due Date in May. This is leading me to think that they defaulted my loan, and are now saying that I owe them the full amount. Obviously, I'm concerned about this affecting my credit report. I made the May payment last night, so now I'm technically "current" with my loan, as the June payment isn't due yet. I left them a message last night, and am planning on talking with them today. But I'd like to know what the law says before I get on the phone with them. Do they have to right to default a loan if I've never been 30 days late with a payment, even if I've been habitually late with my payments? Any advice given would be greatly appreciated. I am in the State of Texas. Thanks!
  15. I don't know. Might want to post that as a separate thread and see what kind of responses you get. Also might try the Post Judgment section of the forum. I would imagine they deal with those questions there all the time. BTW, what did the letter say? Seems strange that they'd send a letter before levying if you've already gotten a judgment. Or do you already have a judgment?? Are you sure it was from the sheriff's office? Sounds like some kind of a scam, to be honest. Sounds like it's a debt collector trying to scare you into paying by saying they're going to levy your account, and then just list a bunch of banks. That doesn't sound legitimate to me. Why don't you post what the letter actually says and we'll go from there. Also note whether or not you have a judgment or have been sued. All that information is important.
  16. Well, you could, as noted, get a savings account with a small local bank or credit union and hope they don't find it (which they might not), and then use the merchants' web sites to have them draw money out of your savings account, instead of you sending it. Also, even though you live paycheck to paycheck, I'm sure once you get into the routine of mailing the payments (a week before they're due, I'm guessing), you'll be able to make it work. Just a question of an adjustment period while you push your payment date back a week or so. But once you adjust, it'll be the same as now. The period for a judgment varies by state. Most are 10 years, I believe. And some states allow judgments to be renewed for a second 10 years. Do an internet search and find out what it is for your state. And, yeah, bankruptcy has its downsides. On the positive side, it allows you to start over with no collection activity. But you'd have to make the bankruptcy payments. It also costs money to go through it. But, like I said, I'm not knowledgeable about it, so I'm not a good source of info. There is a bankruptcy section here in this forum. So I'd definitely check that out. There's also a Post Judgement section, which might help you understand your various options at this point. I'd definitely check them out. Well, a CA (collection agency) collects money. And a JDB (junk debt buyer) buys junk debts (ones that haven't been able to be collected on) and attempts to collect on them. So they both collect money. The difference is that the JDB owns the debt, and the money doesn't go to the original creditor. I don't know anything about Eichenbaum & Styianou. You might want to post a new message in this forum and see if anyone knows about them. (But be careful not to post your name or account info, as Eichenbaum & Styianou might be doing Internet searches and might see your post.) I did find this one thing when I searched Google: Eichenbaum & Stylianou Complaints, Reviews - Terrible company But it doesn't say if they're a JDB or not. In that situation, they were representing Capital One, so maybe they're not. Neil
  17. OK, a few things. First, if you absolutely want to use Bill Pay, then still switch to a credit union. At least your fees with be 1/3 what they are at BofA! My credit union has all the same features as the big banks, and there's no reason to be with a commercial bank. So at least use a credit union checking account and save the fees! Of course, if you open a checking account there, then they'll find you again. But if that's the path you want to take, then at least save the fees with the credit union. (Of course, you might not be able to open a checking account, since you might have the judgment on your credit report. I don't know about that. But it's worth a try anyway.) Second, about the original creditors, they're completely out of the picture at this point. The JDBs bought the debts, and they now own the debts. Any money you send them goes to the JDBs (who paid pennies on the dollar to buy the debts), and the original creditors won't get a penny out of any money the JDBs collect. So, the JDBs are basically bottom-feeders who are trying to make a killing by buying debts on the cheap and exploiting peoples' suffering and bad circumstances. They are not collecting FOR the original creditor. They are collecting for themselves, even though they never loaned you any money. So don't feel that by the JDBs getting your money that somehow it's going back to the original creditor. It's not. Just wanted to make sure that was clear. Re. the original creditor still collecting money from your bill pay, you obviously set that up at some point to automatically pay them. And they're happy to collect the money. But they have no right to it. So turn that off, if you haven't already. And, last, re. "the only way to get rid of these lawyers is to go to court." Nope. Not possible. You already have a judgment against you. "That ship has sailed," as they say. The time to go to court was when they sued you. Once you missed court and got a judgment against you, it's done. The only remedy you might have would be if you were never properly served, and, thus, could not have known about the court date. In that case, you might be able to get the judgment reversed. But if you were properly served and just didn't go to court, then that's the way it goes. Nothing you can do at this point. Your only options would be: 1) Wait it out. Try to hide your money as best as possible. Use money orders and mail in your payments (like in the good ole days, before we had this new-fangled Internet thingie...), or pay with a credit card when possible (which they can't get to since, obviously, it's not money you have). 2) Declare bankruptcy. Then the levies will stop, and the court will put you on a payment plan to pay back (I think) 20% of what you owe over 5 years. I don't know much about bankruptcy, so take that with a grain of salt. 3) Contact the JDB and make arrangements to send them payments in lieu of them levying your accounts. Not sure if they would agree to that, but they might. If it were me, I'd just do #1 and just bite the bullet and lick some envelopes once a month. But hey, that's just me.... Good luck to you, either way!
  18. Also, I don't know if you have any credit cards, but most utility and other bills can be paid by credit card these days (either from the merchant's web site, or from your credit card web site - you can even schedule payments from your credit card web site oftentimes). If you use a credit card for payments, then that's not something they can grab, since it's not money you have, it's "credit" that's available to you. Other than that, I would just open a savings account in a small local credit union, and use that to deposit checks and just withdraw money and get money orders. In the old days we had to mail payments for bills, so it's not that big of a deal. If you get a savings account in a small local credit union I think they're less likely to find you, since they don't have to run a credit check to open a savings account. Don't open a checking account there! Also, even if they do find you and you find yourself in the same situation, credit unions will charge MUCH lower fees than BofA!! When I was with BofA, for example, and overdraft fee was $39. With my credit union it's $10. Overdraft protection transfer was $10. With my credit union it's $3. And so on. So even if the credit union charge you a fee (which they might not), I'd bet it would be somewhere in the $30 range, rather than the $100 that BofA charges. At least that way it wouldn't cost you as much.
  19. Yeah, you have a great point there. It could be that they're looking to sell the company, and are trying to improve their ratio of accounts that they got SOMETHING on, to look better to the buyer. That makes sense. A friend of mine works for a company that runs assisted living facilities. They're trying to sell a few of them, so they're offering bargain-basement prices to get people to move in, so that can show potential buyers that they're full (without revealing to them how much of a discount those people got). So that may very well be what's going on here. Pretty up the books before they're looked at.....
  20. I thought of that. But $29? Seems like they're going lower than low, just to get a payment, not for the money itself. I'd think they'd offer like $100 or $200 if they were really looking for some money from it. But, who knows. Maybe $29 covers all the expense they put into it, with postage and whatnot. One thing's for sure. If this is a new scam by them, we'll probably be seeing people who got ensnared by it posting here in a few months....
  21. Meaning they're hoping a family member would intercept the letter and just make the payment without telling me? I suppose. But that still doesn't address how the SOL would be restarted if it was closed (except perhaps by one of the scenarios I posted above). Yeah, perhaps it's just a last-ditch effort to try to get the SOL restarted by unscrupulous means before they just close out the account and call it a day. Interesting. I wonder if we'll be hearing cases involving these $29 scenarios once they play out?
  22. Another thought is that, even if they don't sell it to another company, they just might apply the payment and not close the account, and then give a person who made the payment the runaround. After all, a tear-off coupon on a letter isn't a legally binding document. But with the evidence of the payment, they could file in court. Of course, if a person came to court, they'd probably win by showing the letter, and the judge would see their trickery and throw the case out. But probably a lot of people wouldn't show up, and they'd get a default judgment. Anyway, like I said, was just curious about this, as to what they were trying to accomplish here. I think, whatever it is, it stinks like a barrel of dead fish.
  23. Again, I have no intention paying them or even contacting them. I thought I made that clear in my original post. My only reason for posting was I was wondering what they could gain by offering this $29 payment? If they're offering to close the account, then they can't restart the SOL. So what is their motivation for offering this? That's what I'm wondering. One thought I had was that: a) they get the $29 payment from the person; then before they close out the account, they sell it to someone else; then c) you contact them and say "why isn't my account closed?" and they say "we no longer own the account"; then d) you contact the new owner saying the account was supposed to be closed, and they say, "We don't know anything about that; but the SOL has been restarted." I bet that's it..... Again, I have (and never had) any intention of contacting them or paying it. I'm just trying to figure out what their scam here is. I bet that's what it is (what I wrote above).
  24. I have a defaulted credit card from 2006. Balance due:$4800. The statute of limitations on this debt expired 2 years ago. Asset Acceptance owns the debt, and they've been regularly sending me letters, trying to get me to pay a smaller and smaller amount. I've just ignored all their letters, and have made no contact with them. Today I received a very strange offer. The letter stated: "If you pay us $29, we will close your account and consider it paid." Now, obviously, my first thought was that they're trying to get the statute of limitations restarted. But since they're offering to "close the account and consider it paid," how could they? If it's paid, it's paid. Another thought was that they're just trying to get me on the phone, to get me to agree to make the payment, and then pull it out, so they can get the SOL restarted. But no phone contact is necessary. There's a tear-off coupon at the bottom which states: "One-time payment of $29 to consider your account paid" and "Discounted Settlement Amount: $29." I have no intention of paying this, so no need to advise me against it. Even if that seemed like a good deal to me, I realize that it would make my last payment date on the account current, and keep it on my credit report for 7 more years. So this is a no-brainer to just ignore the letter, which is what I intend to do. But I'm curious as to what their scheme could be here. What could they possibly gain by offering me a $29 settlement? I don't see how this could restart the SOL (unless I'm not seeing something, which I'd be interested in hearing about). So what else could be their motivation in offering this? Just puzzled by this, and am interested in hearing any theories about it. Thanks!
  25. It sounds fishy because it probably is fishy. More than likely they just took some bill of sale they had for other accounts from the same OC and use that. I had the same situation with the generic Bill of Sale (mine was three bills of sale, to 3 different JDBs), along with a statement copy. I made the argument that the Bill of Sale was generic; didn't mention me or my alleged original account number, nor did it mention in any way any other document that mentioned me. I made the argument that it was a generic document and could apply to anyone, and the judge tossed it! You've got the additional argument that, in addition to being generic, the bill of sale predates your last alleged statement with the original creditor, providing even more evidence that it's not yours. So I'd say you should definitely move to have the Bill of Sale stricken from evidence.