Jump to content

CO car loan..Talked wit the OC and she said no delete!! GRR


Champion80
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just wanted to update you guys that car loan showing on my report..and let you know what she said. The TL is below.

So this is the account that does not show the proper high balance which should be about $15,000. I called today, this company seems to be very small, I talked with the same lady that dealt with this account 4 years ago, she said she worked there for 12 years.

Heres what happen. I called today to get an idea on where I am at with the account, she said the past due amount due is $1,300 from the interest and fees from the balance of $250. I asked her if she would delete the TL if I payed her and she said she wouldnt under any circumstances, and I tried to talk with her person to person, and she would not budge, she offered to settle the account for $500, but with not deletion. She even joked and said whats your address down there in LA, I can have you served tomorrow. So I also joked back with her and told her the SOL on the debt is past the 4 year mark, and she laughed and said who told you that, I can take you to court in 3 months if I wanted to. I made sure I didnt hang up with her mad at me, because I definately do not want her to serve me before I am absolutely sure she is past SOL. I am going to do some research to make sure I am already there, but to clarify, in Cali, when is it time-barred? My FICO report states the DOLA of Feb. 2001, so according to that it would now be 4 years 1 month. I made sure I didnt open the can of worms, but maybe I should, because I asked her specifically why it didnt show the original high balance and she said, all we do is give the information to the CRA and they do what they do. But that is clearly wrong. If I dispute with the CRA the high balance and they do not fix it, can I sue for misleading information?

This one is going to be hard, I called lexington law to consider using their concord service for this account, because she is not going to delete, and thoughts??

18XXXX

Acct Type: Installment

Acct Status: Open

Monthly Payment: $344

Date Open: Sep, 2000

Balance: $249

Terms: N/A

High Balance: $249

Limit: N/A

Past Due: $1,333

Remarks: N/A

Payment Status: Bad debt& placed for collection& skip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who was this "person" you spoke with? A customer service rep? Their legal counsel? Does she work in the department that handles the reporting to the CRA's? Is she a VP?

She seems to think she has a ton of authority I don't think she really has....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, I do not know of the exact department she in, I am not certain if she is the one to report to the CRA's, but I got that bitchy aunt feeling out of her. I was pretty ginger on the phone because I didnt want to push any buttons yet, I just wanted to get a feel for the situation. I was going to follow the DV process, but this one is unique in the way that that OC, which is Organized Labor Credit Union (Union for Construction Laborers). I was a member with the Union and used their financing for my car.

I am not to concerned with the lawsuit part, if she really felt that way she can sue me, I have pre-paid legal so I would have an attorney. But I guess you guys would suggest for me to the DV letter anyway, and try to force a violation right? This one has really got me.

As far as that Lexington Law thing go's, I called them, and was trying to question the service rep that you speak with, she couldnt answer a lot of questions because I was asking things most normal people do not know about, so I gave them my CC information to talk with the paralegal. The concord service apparently pays for additional work on their part, when you go with the main service they only do the disputes and may a couple of other things. With the concord, they do the DV process as well, and they supposedly subpena payment records and all the information that a creditor has to provide upon request. Hence, I am sure this is why they do get some deletions. But of course the Para-legal could only quote how many CO deletions they got, and said they best way to see if they could do anything would be to just try it out for a couple months and if it doesn't work, cancel, of course the downside to this is, you lose your retainer fee, which is the up front cost you pay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that I think about it, I am going to call the company again, and ask what her position was, I am curious myself. Like I said before the whole purpose for my call was just to get an idea on what they had on me. But DOC, her being there for 12 years oviously doesnt mean she has authority, I do not think the company is all that big, so she just may be the head of that department. But of course my only option is to do everything I can to get this account deleted, so I will press.

I did think it was rather funny that she said she could sue me right now if she wanted, what would happen if I did get her to try and sue me, oviously I know I have the SOL time-barred debt defense, but theoretically after the judge dismissed the case or whatever they do, what would happen then to the TL?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Her being stuck there 12 years probably gave her that nasty attitude...

She doesn't have the authority to sue you. Is she going to just waltz into their counsel's office and ask for a blank summons so she can sue you? I'd laugh in her pathetic face.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Her being stuck there 12 years probably gave her that nasty attitude...

I agree with you there DOC, hey this is what the TL looks like on my recent PG pull..

Month: 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2

Equifax: OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK CO CO

The two indicators of a CO at the end, are concurrent with two recent disputes with the CRA's. You probably already know this but the legend at the bottom of the PG report says CO means collection or chargeoff, I am trying to determine if this is some type of violation? Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks to me like they stopped reporting and then "verified" the information with PG (who may or may not have their own ideas of reporting a charged off account).

Still it makes little sense why the account would be reported "OK"....

I'm stumped. :?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.