Jreed

Members
  • Content Count

    43
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

12 Good

About Jreed

  • Rank
    Newbie

Profile Fields

  • Location
    Wisconsin
  1. As near as I can tell they have the right address. But I'm looking at Experian online right now and they don't list the address with each individual account. Thinking back to my written reports, I don't recall seeing the address at an individual account level either. Am I missing something? In some cases I would bet that they do have the wrong address...I just don't see it listed.
  2. I'm not entirely sure what you mean. I've been at this address for quite a while, but there are old addresses in the cra files. I'm not exactly sure how that would help. Could you explain what you mean a little more? With AA, I was under the impression that in order to report, they had to have some kind of proof that they owned this debt. So my for them the options were to send an ITS or actually sue per the FCRA. With Chase, well that debt is beyond SOL and they filed a 1099c. Its my understanding that in both cases the debt is now zero. As such, the fact that they are reporting a balance is a violation of the FCRA. Am I wrong in that thinking?
  3. So I've been doing a lot of reading and reviewing what others have done. I'd like to make sure I'm following along the right path. Story: Lots of old CC debt. SOL on everything expires starting in Feb 2014. However SOL has "technically" expired in WI about 3 years ago as we borrow the shorter SOL. Deleware has a 3 year SOL, so any DE cards have technically gone beyond the SOL. This is up for some debate, but I'm willing to fight that battle if need be. Two months back I decided to get aggressive about credit repair instead of simply sitting back. I had about 4-5 disputes go out to the CRA's and my wife had a few more. We've since gotten responses on all the CRA stuff. I then followed up with two of my wife accounts, one with AA and another with Chase. AA: They responded to my validation request with general information and a refusal to remove the negative mark on my CR's. They did not provide any proof that they owned the debt or really anything else...they only provided a blurb saying it was valid and that they were reporting properly. Question: Is my next step another letter demanding the proof that they own the debt, or at least some evidence that its a real debt. OR, is my next step an ITS letter followed up by a suit? I'm sure I could do either, so looking for a little experience from others here. I'd prefer to avoid the costs of a suit, but am willing to do it if I have to. Chase: They are the OC. I have sent them a 623 investigation letter. They already filed a 1099c on the debt, plus it is beyond the SOL. They have another week or so to respond. Question: As everyone has fought me every step of the way, I anticipate they will fight me too. Which means they will respond with a refusal to correct my CR's. Is my next step an ITS letter, or just go right into the suit. In this case I actually suspect a letter to their legal dept. might get traction as I've heard their lawyers know they should be reporting a zero balance once they have filed a 1099c. I have other stuff out there, but these two are the most pressing as AA is killing my wife's credit report. Any thoughts/experiences would be appreciated. Especially if you've had to go all the way with some of the OC's/Collectors.
  4. The judge never said she "understood" it. She simply said we didn't meet the burden of proof in the 7th circuit. She did actually say that on its face it might be confusing, she didn't go further than that. In a way her ruling was a win for us as she did make note of some of the discrepencies and issues she saw. She just wasn't willing to give us the win without meeting our burden.
  5. Ok, guys, we can argue confusing and misleading all day. My question is more along the lines of how do I go about proving it. So in this case, in the 7th circuit the judge specifically sited customer surveys. I take that to mean I need to give their communications to this company, they create a survey of some kind and give it to "people" to see if they find it confusing. Is anyone aware of companies that do this? The problem with this is that we can get an "expert", but then the defense will just get their own "expert". What we're trying to do, and the 7th circuit has mentioned this in rulings as well, is find a good unbiased place that both parties can agree to and then have the court appoint them. That way we're both somewhat bound by the response of these surveys and we don't get into an expert witness pissing match. We may not be able to do that as the defense may not play ball. The 7th circuit may force the issue as well...we just want to be prepared. I've heard certain universities do surveys like this. Not 100% on that. http://www.masstortdefense.com/2010/03/articles/seventh-circuit-decides-fdcpa-class-claims-and-offers-survey-guidance/
  6. Both say zero. and when I say two accounts, I mean two accounts from two different OC's. The JDB sent a letter claiming I owe the JDB and the OC is OC A. I asked for validation. They then sent me another letter stating I owe OC A, but then sent me 3 statements...two from OC A, and then another statement from OC B. Both OC's are in fact, OC's, and both accounts are real with two separate #'s and opened at different times with similar max balances. On all three statements they had the amount in question as exactly the same in the body of the statement. But then at the bottom where it says "new balance" the balance is zero. furthermore all three statements say "total minimum due" = zero. My concern is that as a sophisticated consumer, I'm confused. I'm not sure what they're trying to do with this mess. But I can see the least sophisticated consumer being railroaded by this. Making a payment on this could easily restart the SOL in some states.
  7. Folks, I'm in the middle of a lawsuit against one of the most well known and disliked JDB's around. It's fun stuff. My attorney and I had filed an MSJ against them for a violation of FDCPA 1692e. (Confusing/misleading communications.) The judge ended up denying the MSJ on the grounds that the communications was not so stupidly confusing as to warrant an MSJ, however left it wide open for a jury. She also said that the 7th circuit (federal) has some precedence regarding "evidence" that a communication is confusing/misleading to the "least sophistiated consumer". Now, while I am biased, their communication really is insanely confusing. I have a letter that states I owe $5k to Creditor A. When I asked for validation I got another letter stating I owe $5k, but they sent me three bank statements. 2 of those statements from Creditor A, and one statement is from Creditor B. Different account numbers, different banks, magically the exact same balance...however in the balance due it says zero. payment due is also zero. In all seriousness, I am not the least sophisticated consumer and I am legitimately confused. Do I owe creditor A, or Creditor B? If I make the payment, does it cover both alleged debts or just one? If I owe a debt why do the statements have a zero balance? Why is the payment due zero? I honestly have no idea. Here is my primary question to the group. In the 7th circuit you have to provide some form of evidence that the communication was confusing. In the ruling, the judge specifically called out consumer surveys which apparently have been used in the past. So I need to find a company or school or someone that does legitimate consumer surveys. Has anyone had to deal with anything like that? The company can be anywhere in the country.
  8. Will do. I'm in a bit of a unique situation being from Wisconsin. We have very strong consumer protection laws, stronger than FDCPA. Plus we are one of two states with a statute of Repose. Repose happens to be what these guys violated...and as I have the violations on their letterhead it will be pretty tough for them to dispute. I'll be sending everything out tomorrow. I doubt I'll hear anything until after I actually file the complaint later in December. I've never gotten a response from an ITS letter.
  9. Thank you!! I suspect an ITS letter with the complaint attached sent directly to these three will have more of an impact than a letter sent to the PO Box.
  10. Does anyone have a current address for LVNV? Everything here is a little stale. I need a physical address as I intend to sue them. Thanks
  11. Does anyone know if WI is a choice of law state?
  12. Ok, I have a BoA account that a law firm is collecting on. I sent the DV and they validated with a simple letter within 2 days. (not a good sign). However on another thread and board someone mentioned that BoA is subject to Deleware's SOL which is 3 years. Well the last payment on this account Feb 2008. SO its been well over 3 years. Two Questions. #1 - Even though I am in WI, has the SOL really expired? #2 - Assuming the SOL has expired, should I send a letter to the CA stating that in an effort to avoid a lawsuit? Thanks
  13. ok...I just pm'd with trueq on the other board. BoA is in Deleware. And deleware law has a SOL of 3 years. With that in mind, should I send a simple letter to the CA saying the debt is beyond the statute of limitations in DE where the OC resides and if they choose to sue me I will not hesitate to file an immediate counterclaim? I had no idea DE law would apply. Family And Consumer Law-- The Blog: Thinking About Delaware Can Make Me Money? Tell Me More!
  14. It is a CC. BoA in fact. But I do not have the cardholder agreement. is there a way to find out if I can invoke arbitration with BoA.