Sign in to follow this  
skdigi

Paid the OC but CA still verifying Paid??

Recommended Posts

I have made great progress in the past year thanks to these and other credit boards:) I am now down to tackling the few sticky negs I have. The one I'm concentrating right now is:

A CA has listed on my report that I pd $160 on a traffic ticket to them. I already aked them validate the debt and they printed me off a screen from the courthouse which is a publicly accessable website where you can just type in someone's name/dob and see what charges they've had against them.

to me that is NOT validation because it does not show that I paid THEM.

Now I know this had went to collections when I went to the courthouse to pay them, but the courthouse would be the OC, correct?

Am I in the right to write them and ask for proof that I paid THEM (CA) and since they can't to demand deletion?? It has been disputed off TU and EXP but not CSC(EQ)

* I have the reciept from when I pd cash at the courthouse

Thanks!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That makes for an interesting argument, but if you paid the ticket based upon the notice you received from the CA, they are correct in reporting it the way they are since it was because of their collection activity that you remedied the situation.

However, any method you can think to remove a collection is in your best interest.

You can contact the court and tell them you were told the collection would be recalled upon receipt of payment, dispute with the CRAs as "to be deleted upon receipt of payment per agreement, etc....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The CA is under contract with the municipality, so see if you can get the Court to tell the CA to delete it from your credit report. Get your councilman in on the act: it costs nothing for him to act on your behalf, and think of the goodwill it can generate.

Send a letter to the supervising judge with a mea culpa and a request he, in his administrative capacity, tell the CA to have it deleted from you report.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you paid the collection agency or the ticket, and the agency is reporting it as paid and the account is closed, you are not entitled to validation of debt. The account is not covered under the FDCPA. It sounds like you paid it, you know it is paid, and the agency is reporting it correctly. You are out of luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
The account is not covered under the FDCPA. It sounds like you paid it, you know it is paid, and the agency is reporting it correctly. You are out of luck.

There is this nice little law called the FCRA.

Did she pay the collection agency??

NO SHE DID NOT!!

When I had a collection on my report for blood work for my child.. the insurance went back and paid because it was supposed to.

The CA deleted the account because it was paid but NOT TO THEM

FCRA says information has to be 100% correct.

You are talking about legal terms and law.. the smallest change in wording can make or break a case.

She did not pay the CA.. they have no right to report.

IMHO..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, but I found out the hard way myself that traffic tickets are not consumer debt and not subject to the FDCPA. Collectors hired by the municipality to go after citations are not required to follow any of the FDCPA provisions. They can harrass you until the sun explodes and there is no protection under the law. And they don't have to respond to DV either.

They do have to follow the FCRA though. And in this case they don't appear to be doing it by the book. Go after them for the reporting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Skywarner - that was a very clever move on your part. Can you tell me what section of the FCRA you quoted to the CA can CRA in order to have that account removed? I have the exact same situation and I think you have solved it for me.

Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

OK here we go boys and girls.

Now remember.. we are talking law here.. just because you PAID the debt doesnt mean you paid the CA..

They have to report 100% accurate information..

Did the CA get paid??

Nope..

Case closed.

Here is the section from the FCRA:

623. Responsibilities of furnishers of information to consumer reporting agencies [15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2]

(a) Duty of furnishers of information to provide accurate information.

(1) Prohibition.

(A) Reporting information with actual knowledge of errors. A person shall not furnish any information relating to a consumer to any consumer reporting agency if the person knows or consciously avoids knowing that the information is inaccurate.

(B) Reporting information after notice and confirmation of errors. A person shall not furnish information relating to a consumer to any consumer reporting agency if

(i) the person has been notified by the consumer, at the address specified by the person for such notices, that specific information is inaccurate; and

(ii) the information is, in fact, inaccurate.

© No address requirement. A person who clearly and conspicuously specifies to the consumer an address for notices referred to in subparagraph (B) shall not be subject to subparagraph (A); however, nothing in subparagraph (B) shall require a person to specify such an address.

(2) Duty to correct and update information. A person who

(A) regularly and in the ordinary course of business furnishes information to one or more consumer reporting agencies about the person's transactions or experiences with any consumer; and

(B) has furnished to a consumer reporting agency information that the person determines is not complete or accurate,

shall promptly notify the consumer reporting agency of that determination and provide to the agency any corrections to that information, or any additional information, that is necessary to make the information provided by the person to the agency complete and accurate, and shall not thereafter furnish to the agency any of the information that remains not complete or accurate.

(3) Duty to provide notice of dispute. If the completeness or accuracy of any information furnished by any person to any consumer reporting agency is disputed to such person by a consumer, the person may not furnish the information to any consumer reporting agency without notice that such information is disputed by the consumer.

(4) Duty to provide notice of closed accounts. A person who regularly and in the ordinary course of business furnishes information to a consumer reporting agency regarding a consumer who has a credit account with that person shall notify the agency of the voluntary closure of the account by the consumer, in information regularly furnished for the period in which the account is closed.

(5) Duty to provide notice of delinquency of accounts. A person who furnishes information to a consumer reporting agency regarding a delinquent account being placed for collection, charged to profit or loss, or subjected to any similar action shall, not later than 90 days after furnishing the information, notify the agency of the month and year of the commencement of the delinquency that immediately preceded the action.

(B) Duties of furnishers of information upon notice of dispute.

(1) In general. After receiving notice pursuant to section 611(a)(2) [§ 1681i] of a dispute with regard to the completeness or accuracy of any information provided by a person to a consumer reporting agency, the person shall

(A) conduct an investigation with respect to the disputed information;

(B) review all relevant information provided by the consumer reporting agency pursuant to section 611(a)(2) [§ 1681i];

© report the results of the investigation to the consumer reporting agency; and

(D) if the investigation finds that the information is incomplete or inaccurate, report those results to all other consumer reporting agencies to which the person furnished the information and that compile and maintain files on consumers on a nationwide basis.

(2) Deadline. A person shall complete all investigations, reviews, and reports required under paragraph (1) regarding information provided by the person to a consumer reporting agency, before the expiration of the period under section 611(a)(1) [§ 1681i] within which the consumer reporting agency is required to complete actions required by that section regarding that information.

© Limitation on liability. Sections 616 and 617 [§§ 1681n and 1681o] do not apply to any failure to comply with subsection (a), except as provided in section 621©(1)(B) [§ 1681s].

(d) Limitation on enforcement. Subsection (a) shall be enforced exclusively under section 621 [§ 1681s] by the Federal agencies and officials and the State officials identified in that section.

Any questions boys and girls?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had great succes doing this. I paid the original creditor then I sent a dispute to the cra's disputing what the ca put on my report, then I sent a dv letter to the ca. 30 days the tl was gone.

I do not know if it had anything to do with paying but I had disputed before and it came back verified.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this