Tootsie88

Members
  • Content Count

    109
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Tootsie88 last won the day on May 12 2011

Tootsie88 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

112 Excellent

About Tootsie88

  • Rank
    CIC Member

Profile Fields

  • Location
    NY
  1. But their not iniatating a suit or threatening to. They are simply trying to collect on a 16 year old debt. When I told them to go pound sand and never call me again, the representative got salty and pulled a hard inquiry. When I was alerted by equifax that an inquiry was made, I called and spoke to a supervisor. He agreed that the representive shouldn't have pulled a hard inquiry and would have it removed within 3-7 days. It's been 6 weeks and a few emails back and forth promising regarding it to no avail. I figured since they had no permissible purpose, as I understand it and the supervisor agreed, why the hold up? And I find the law lacking with respect to zombie debts.
  2. Okay, I just filed a complaint with the CFPB. Let's see how things go from here. Thanks again.
  3. This debt fell off my account in 2001. It was a cell phone account (2 year statue) I had back in 1998. I still can't find the permissible purpose in that. *confused*
  4. Thank you very much. Just so you know, I've been in contact with them via email and they advised me that they would have it removed with 3 - 7 days. This was 6 weeks ago. How long do I have to wait before I get serious.
  5. Hello everyone: In reviewing my credit report I noticed that Dynamic Recovery Services pulled a hard inquire on my CR on a debit that is nearing 17 years old. A hard inquiry??? Where's the permissible purpose in that? I read what constitutes permissible purposes but can't find anything on debts over 15 years old. Any insight is greatly appreciated.
  6. I just found this on line... "if you know the trust series that your mortgage loan was securitized into (in this case the servicer ABC - who purchased DEFs servicing rights) then you will know who hold your mortgage. The security underwriters to the trust series (names such as Credit Suisse, Banc of America Securities, Citigroup etc.) are the ONLY certificate holders to the trust series. All certificates to trust series are sold to the named security underwriters ONLY (you may locate this information in Securities and Exchange Documents such as 424B5 prospectus and 8-K (not the pooling and servicing agreement)). Sometimes a collateral annex is attached which will show principal amount for mortgages sold to the trust and you may be able to locate a principal balance that matches your own. After the certificates to the trust are sold to the security underwriters, the security underwriters (that is all rights to mortgage loans are sold to security underwriters) then will repackage the loans into Collateralized Mortgage Obligations (CMOs/CDOs) which are THEN broken into pieces and sold around the world. Right now there are few investors in the CMOs/CDOs. It important to know that is the named security underwriter on trust series who owns your loan. Now government is trying to get these loans off the books of the banks - THEY ARE THE ONLY ONES WHO OWN THE MORTGAGE LOANS as all certificates to created trusts are sold to named security underwriter." Geez!!! Guess I'll start with the SEC.
  7. It's really BAD big Sis... I mean really BAD! My Mod is loaded with robo signers from the affiant to the notary to the note to the mortgage docs. The bank forged my signature on the note and the mortgage. And what's worse is what I signed is completely different from what they submitted to the county clerks office. I called HUD and well, let's just say they are not happy at all. I have no clue who I'm paying my mortgage to and the servicer continues to tell me what I am requesting is out of the scope of what they can provide. I did the QWR and all they send me is a payment history, a list of codes they use and a fake note and mortgage. Once the government let the banks off the hook who can you trust? I'm certain I can litigate but at what cost? What a mess!
  8. I have been trying to find who really owns my mortgage/note. I've sent a QWR (twice) and still no cigar. They won't even tell me who the investors are. And I was unaware that certain investors can remain anonymous as well. What is the big secret? There has to be some instrument showing who owns the mortgage. I am beyond annoyed by this. Any help is greatly appreciated.
  9. Thanks guys. I just find the law vauge at best. In this case it's my mortgage company which has always had the same cell number for 13 years. Around November of 2011 they decided they would begin robo calling me anywhere from 6 to 7 times per day leaving those computerized messages on my vmail. At one point I got so sick of it I called them and asked why, what was the purpose and to please stop!! The representative said it was just a reminder call and that he would remove my number from their automatic dialer. Well, four months after that conversation (and after racking up 132 calls) I decided to file a suit. At that point, I said now they clearly have to stop. Well I was dead wrong!!! They are still calling and I have received a total of 102 robo calls since we filed (total 234 calls). If filing a suit isn't getting the message across what will? No one can be this stupid or...? Just to be on the safe side I did check my orginating documents and there is no mention of giving "expressed consent" to robo call me. SIghs. All I have to say is, I hope they call while in court. Thanks again.
  10. Question: With respect to TCPA, to have expressed consent one would need "informed consent" before having expressed consent. Right or wrong? After all, upon meeting someone and shaking their hand does not give them expressed consent to take the keys to your car does it? I'm asking because since most consumers have moved to a mobile-only phone enviroment for just about everything, having your number with a company you've been dealing with for over 13 years decides they want to robo call you and claims they had consent based on that, yet you were never "informed" that to deal with them by phone gives them the right to robo call you. Let's face it, if the only means of communcating with someone via their mobile number (and email) how does that entitle them to robo call you? Confused Any help in understand this would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.
  11. You've gotten good advice here. I would only add (since it's P&P) that you read the summons very carefully. Then read the affidavit carefully looking for discrepancies such as account numbers, amounts and type of account ie: cell phone bill, credit card bill, etc. If you find discrepancies, you can use each instance that corresponds with each numbered count. I had their complaint against me dismissed "with prejudice" because the complaint alleged a cell phone account and yet the affidavit alleged a credit card account.
  12. Did you know that your ssdi is exempt for garnishment? Anyway, if you submitted your answer wait for them to reply with opposition. I wouldn't send any of my vital statics to anyone if I were you, including bank statements, etc.
  13. I would call them and ask them what's the hold up in releasing your refund. The country is a bust so the lag is to be expected. If you owe them nothing, ask why are they on your credit report. Did I understand you right?