ViktorVaughn Posted March 11, 2005 Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 original creditor: bank of america situation: revolving account is charged off and sent to "asset acceptance llc"what is seen on a credit report: both bank of america and asset management are reporting the debt on a consumer's credit file. the question: is this right? if bank of america charged off the account and sent it to an outside agency for collections, it seems like they should delete their entry on the consumer's credit report, as the new agency (asset acceptance) will then report the debt. is it right for both entities to be reporting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViktorVaughn Posted March 11, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 original creditor: bank of america situation: revolving account is charged off and sent to "asset acceptance llc"what is seen on a credit report: both bank of america and asset management are reporting the debt on a consumer's credit file. the question: is this right? if bank of america charged off the account and sent it to an outside agency for collections, it seems like they should delete their entry on the consumer's credit report, as the new agency (asset acceptance) will then report the debt. is it right for both entities to be reporting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anti-something Posted March 11, 2005 Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 you work for a collection agency and dont know about credit reporting? why am i not surprised...yes, both entities can report, its a credit HISTORY. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anti-something Posted March 11, 2005 Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 you work for a collection agency and dont know about credit reporting? why am i not surprised...yes, both entities can report, its a credit HISTORY. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViktorVaughn Posted March 11, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 you work for a collection agency and dont know about credit reporting? why am i not surprised...i don't work with revolving credit.would you expect a cardiovasular doctor to know the details involved in setting a broken tibia? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViktorVaughn Posted March 11, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 you work for a collection agency and dont know about credit reporting? why am i not surprised...i don't work with revolving credit.would you expect a cardiovasular doctor to know the details involved in setting a broken tibia? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocDon Posted March 11, 2005 Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 Pay your bills you deadbeat! All jokes aside, Asset purchased the debt outright from BoA. BoA must report the account with a $0 balance, and "sold/transfered to another lender".Here's the deal. If BoA sold all interest in the account to Asset, what information are they witholding in order to verify a dispute. Remember, these companies claim to sell ALL rights (which is why you get the "we can't help you" response when you call). A good question to call them out on when writing to their executive offices.Add into the equation that Asset bought the debt for pennies on the dollar, and then decides to come after you for the entire note, plus fees and interest. That's where this comes in:Coppola v. Arrow Financial Services, 302CV577, 2002 WL 32173704(D.Conn., Oct. 29, 2002) – Information relating to the purchase of a bad debt is not proprietary or burdensome. Debtor must phrase their request clearly to obtain: The source of a debt and the amount a bad debt buyer paid for plaintiff’s debt, how amount sought was calculated, where in issue a list of reports to credit bureaus, and documents conferring authority on defendant to collect debt.And yes, I would expect a cardiologist to be able to set a leg - it's one the first brutal skills a doctor learns... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocDon Posted March 11, 2005 Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 Pay your bills you deadbeat! All jokes aside, Asset purchased the debt outright from BoA. BoA must report the account with a $0 balance, and "sold/transfered to another lender".Here's the deal. If BoA sold all interest in the account to Asset, what information are they witholding in order to verify a dispute. Remember, these companies claim to sell ALL rights (which is why you get the "we can't help you" response when you call). A good question to call them out on when writing to their executive offices.Add into the equation that Asset bought the debt for pennies on the dollar, and then decides to come after you for the entire note, plus fees and interest. That's where this comes in:Coppola v. Arrow Financial Services, 302CV577, 2002 WL 32173704(D.Conn., Oct. 29, 2002) – Information relating to the purchase of a bad debt is not proprietary or burdensome. Debtor must phrase their request clearly to obtain: The source of a debt and the amount a bad debt buyer paid for plaintiff’s debt, how amount sought was calculated, where in issue a list of reports to credit bureaus, and documents conferring authority on defendant to collect debt.And yes, I would expect a cardiologist to be able to set a leg - it's one the first brutal skills a doctor learns... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViktorVaughn Posted March 11, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 what if both bank of america and asset acceptance are showing a balance due?And yes, I would expect a cardiologist to be able to set a leg - it's one the first brutal skills a doctor learns...that was a rhetorical question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViktorVaughn Posted March 11, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 what if both bank of america and asset acceptance are showing a balance due?And yes, I would expect a cardiologist to be able to set a leg - it's one the first brutal skills a doctor learns...that was a rhetorical question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocDon Posted March 11, 2005 Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 Then BoA is wrong. If you disputed the info and it came back verified, they are even more wrong, and are now liable for verifying incorrect information with the CRA's....Also, if Asset is listing the information based upon what you owed BoA instead of what they actually paid for the debt..... not sure if that's been tried before, but it makes sense if you think about it. If the debt was for $5K and Asset only really paid $1K, they are technically giving false information by reporting the $5K+ balance to the CRAs...Worth a shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocDon Posted March 11, 2005 Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 Then BoA is wrong. If you disputed the info and it came back verified, they are even more wrong, and are now liable for verifying incorrect information with the CRA's....Also, if Asset is listing the information based upon what you owed BoA instead of what they actually paid for the debt..... not sure if that's been tried before, but it makes sense if you think about it. If the debt was for $5K and Asset only really paid $1K, they are technically giving false information by reporting the $5K+ balance to the CRAs...Worth a shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anti-something Posted March 11, 2005 Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 then the B of A TL is wrong, they cant report a balance due if they sold it, coz they sold it, there is no balance due. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anti-something Posted March 11, 2005 Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 then the B of A TL is wrong, they cant report a balance due if they sold it, coz they sold it, there is no balance due. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViktorVaughn Posted March 11, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 Then BoA is wrong. If you disputed the info and it came back verified, they are even more wrong, and are now liable for verifying incorrect information with the CRA's....Also, if Asset is listing the information based upon what you owed BoA instead of what they actually paid for the debt..... not sure if that's been tried before, but it makes sense if you think about it. If the debt was for $5K and Asset only really paid $1K, they are technically giving false information by reporting the $5K+ balance to the CRAs...Worth a shot.thanks for the info. and for the record, this is not my debt. 2 friends and i were turned down for a rental property several days ago, so we all obtained a free credit report. one of us had perfect credit, one had this, and me....i had a collection item from "video mania" (a rental place i assumed). upon calling the collection agency to find out what "video mania" is, i was informed that they are in fact a video rental store. (the funny part). they say i rented "mondo violence 8" and "faces of death 3" in january of 2000. i told the woman that i don't recall ever having an account with a "video mania", but it may be possible as i do like ot rent movies. however, i certainly have never rented the videos in question (which they say i never returned, and so i now owe them $100). anyhow, the only thing i could come up with is that an old roommate used my card and didn't return the videos. nevertheless, i am going to pay them, as i simply don't have the time to go through the dispute process. (finding a house to rent in this hurricane ravaged city of pensacola florida is NOT an easy thing to do. rental properties seem to be listed for only a day before they are snatched up....for virtually twice what they were going for 9 months ago) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViktorVaughn Posted March 11, 2005 Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 Then BoA is wrong. If you disputed the info and it came back verified, they are even more wrong, and are now liable for verifying incorrect information with the CRA's....Also, if Asset is listing the information based upon what you owed BoA instead of what they actually paid for the debt..... not sure if that's been tried before, but it makes sense if you think about it. If the debt was for $5K and Asset only really paid $1K, they are technically giving false information by reporting the $5K+ balance to the CRAs...Worth a shot.thanks for the info. and for the record, this is not my debt. 2 friends and i were turned down for a rental property several days ago, so we all obtained a free credit report. one of us had perfect credit, one had this, and me....i had a collection item from "video mania" (a rental place i assumed). upon calling the collection agency to find out what "video mania" is, i was informed that they are in fact a video rental store. (the funny part). they say i rented "mondo violence 8" and "faces of death 3" in january of 2000. i told the woman that i don't recall ever having an account with a "video mania", but it may be possible as i do like ot rent movies. however, i certainly have never rented the videos in question (which they say i never returned, and so i now owe them $100). anyhow, the only thing i could come up with is that an old roommate used my card and didn't return the videos. nevertheless, i am going to pay them, as i simply don't have the time to go through the dispute process. (finding a house to rent in this hurricane ravaged city of pensacola florida is NOT an easy thing to do. rental properties seem to be listed for only a day before they are snatched up....for virtually twice what they were going for 9 months ago) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocDon Posted March 11, 2005 Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 and for the record, this is not my debt.I was just ribbing you. I always wanted to say that to a CA.... Your other option is to go the fraud route, but that would involve filing a police report against your friend - something you prolly aren't considering.I'm sure you've read enough to get a written agreement that they will recall and delete the negative entry upon receipt of payment... remember - this has more to do with FICO than with the old CA/Consumer battle....Sounds like you're a victim of supply and demand (and gouging landlords). Hope you're able to find something.Good luck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocDon Posted March 11, 2005 Report Share Posted March 11, 2005 and for the record, this is not my debt.I was just ribbing you. I always wanted to say that to a CA.... Your other option is to go the fraud route, but that would involve filing a police report against your friend - something you prolly aren't considering.I'm sure you've read enough to get a written agreement that they will recall and delete the negative entry upon receipt of payment... remember - this has more to do with FICO than with the old CA/Consumer battle....Sounds like you're a victim of supply and demand (and gouging landlords). Hope you're able to find something.Good luck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Champion80 Posted March 12, 2005 Report Share Posted March 12, 2005 If you want to make that Collection quick and painless, I would call whomever the CA is, and tell them exactly what you said about your "old roomate", let them know you had no idea you owed the amount and would like to pay it, but make sure they send you a letter to delete the file. And how in the hell did they come up with $100 on 2 videos?? Isnt there any laws here as far as the amount a rented product can cost you if never returned? I know blockbuster for example would after a certain amount of not returning a video charge you for the movie as though you bought it..$100 Ram that up your A$$!. Make sure you offer way less than they are asking..What CA do you work for?? Of course you can keep that confidential but I think you could be helpfull to those looking to repair their credit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Champion80 Posted March 12, 2005 Report Share Posted March 12, 2005 If you want to make that Collection quick and painless, I would call whomever the CA is, and tell them exactly what you said about your "old roomate", let them know you had no idea you owed the amount and would like to pay it, but make sure they send you a letter to delete the file. And how in the hell did they come up with $100 on 2 videos?? Isnt there any laws here as far as the amount a rented product can cost you if never returned? I know blockbuster for example would after a certain amount of not returning a video charge you for the movie as though you bought it..$100 Ram that up your A$$!. Make sure you offer way less than they are asking..What CA do you work for?? Of course you can keep that confidential but I think you could be helpfull to those looking to repair their credit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valkyrine Posted March 12, 2005 Report Share Posted March 12, 2005 And how in the hell did they come up with $100 on 2 videos?? Isnt there any laws here as far as the amount a rented product can cost you if never returned? IDepends on the member contract you sign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valkyrine Posted March 12, 2005 Report Share Posted March 12, 2005 And how in the hell did they come up with $100 on 2 videos?? Isnt there any laws here as far as the amount a rented product can cost you if never returned? IDepends on the member contract you sign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadyButler Posted March 12, 2005 Report Share Posted March 12, 2005 Regarding the $100...Back in the day, I worked for a smaller chain video store. You know that Federal Warning that comes up at the beginning of every videotape? Each video a store buys for rental purposes costs much more than a regular retail video in order to comply with the licensing laws. I remember some new releases costing as much as $150 a tape... (which incidentally is why smaller chains don't have the new release inventory that giants like Blockbuster have... it costs an arm and a leg!)Bottom line- make sure they tell you what exactly the $100 has come from... if it's to replace two $50 tapes... that's one thing. If it's $70 in late fees with two $15.00 replacement tape fees- fight it. I'd only pay $30 to replace the tapes...Good luck!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadyButler Posted March 12, 2005 Report Share Posted March 12, 2005 Regarding the $100...Back in the day, I worked for a smaller chain video store. You know that Federal Warning that comes up at the beginning of every videotape? Each video a store buys for rental purposes costs much more than a regular retail video in order to comply with the licensing laws. I remember some new releases costing as much as $150 a tape... (which incidentally is why smaller chains don't have the new release inventory that giants like Blockbuster have... it costs an arm and a leg!)Bottom line- make sure they tell you what exactly the $100 has come from... if it's to replace two $50 tapes... that's one thing. If it's $70 in late fees with two $15.00 replacement tape fees- fight it. I'd only pay $30 to replace the tapes...Good luck!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Champion80 Posted March 12, 2005 Report Share Posted March 12, 2005 Excellent post Lady, that is exactly what I was thinking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts