Jump to content

Potential loophole to get a TL removed?


Recommended Posts

I had a telephone account that was turned over to a CA. On my CR that one debt turned into 4 CAs reporting it concurrently. Before I knew any better I contacted the first one and the subsequent three, each telling me I had to call such-and-such as they now own this debt. When I got to the fourth CA they directed me to a CA that wasn't even reporting it on my CR, as it had been newly transferred (this would be CA # 5 for this one debt). I contacted them and made a payment, asking for a paper receipt.

Ok, so I paid the non reporting CA by credit card, never got a receipt but have it on a statement. All of the CA TLs on my CR are gone except for the fourth one (the one that directed me to the fifth CA). They are reporting the debt as paid with $0 balance.

What recourse and argument can I make with the CRA to get this one removed.

I never paid this CA, I paid someone else so how can I even have an account with them?

Do I dispute with the CA or CRA as inaccurate and ask for proof?

I may be out of luck since it's paid, but somehow I feel like the erroneous reporting might give me an opportunity to use the legalisites to have it removed.

I'm not sure how to approcah this one. Any suggestions would be great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is going to be much harder to do, because you paid it. Paying is an admission of sorts that it is yours and correct. It can be done, but you are probably going to be stuck.

No... I don't think that is right...

He didn't pay the "fourth" CA, he paid the "fifth" one... As a result, the fourth one doesn't have jack [EXPLETIVE DELETED] on him.

What I would do is DV that "fourth" CA. He didn't pay [EXPLETIVE DELETED] to the fourth CA so they are not going to have jack on file. Keep DV'ing the fourth CA because they have no proof whatsoever other than some bogus printouts... I don't think they could come up with verification.

Try it and let us know what happens...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No... I don't think that is right...

He didn't pay the "fourth" CA, he paid the "fifth" one... As a result, the fourth one doesn't have jack [EXPLETIVE DELETED] on him.

What I would do is DV that "fourth" CA. He didn't pay [EXPLETIVE DELETED] to the fourth CA so they are not going to have jack on file. Keep DV'ing the fourth CA because they have no proof whatsoever other than some bogus printouts... I don't think they could come up with verification.

He is right!

The pay for delete or in this case non-report would have been good for the fifth CA but hopefully they got their money and won't report.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He may have a problem if the fourth CA was a JDB. They own the right to collect and if he paid the fifth CA, the fourth is not bound to delete. As long as they accurately list the TL as a paid collection, possibly with the dispute notice, he may be stuck.

The OP doesn't say he did PFD. He just paid. The FDCPA no longer applies, as they are no longer collecting a debt, but simply reporting it. The FCRA would be the controlling law here, and I do not see where the #4 CA is violating.

All they would have to do is show he paid it, and that the balance is now $0. When he paid it, the court will look at it like he knew it was valid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

divemedic, you are correct. I did not do a PFD, I just paid the amount to CA #5.

I understand the correctness of reporting the TL by CA #4 as far as the debt goes, and most likely I'm stuck with it until it falls off the CRA report.

What I was hoping to devise, is a reason to dispute #4 as inaccurate. But if, as you stated, #4 owns the right to collect and they collected it from #5 then that's a brick wall. I was trying to get to the point of showing that I did not pay #4, and therefore how can they report it as paid? (possible answer: they own the right to collect). I get that, but I also feel like it's one of those arguable points and if I beat it into the ground it may be taken off at some point.

Here's where I am in this effort:

- I paid #5 in early Oct.'05

- I disputed with the CRA in early Nov. '05

- CRA responded as verified with new info in report (it's updated as paid now)

- I MOV'd the CRA, and simultaneously DV'd the CA (#4) in mid-Dec. '05

I'll have to wait and see what happens now. Maybe the confusion will contribute to helping in getting it removed. I'm also taking the risk that the CA will validate and add it to the other two CRA's (it's only on one now). But I have that gut feeling about it so we'll see.

Thanks everyone so far, more comments and advice is definitely welcome. I'll post here as this progresses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a telephone account that was turned over to a CA. On my CR that one debt turned into 4 CAs reporting it concurrently. Before I knew any better I contacted the first one and the subsequent three, each telling me I had to call such-and-such as they now own this debt. When I got to the fourth CA they directed me to a CA that wasn't even reporting it on my CR, as it had been newly transferred (this would be CA # 5 for this one debt). I contacted them and made a payment, asking for a paper receipt.

Ok, so I paid the non reporting CA by credit card, never got a receipt but have it on a statement. All of the CA TLs on my CR are gone except for the fourth one (the one that directed me to the fifth CA). They are reporting the debt as paid with $0 balance.

What recourse and argument can I make with the CRA to get this one removed.

I never paid this CA, I paid someone else so how can I even have an account with them?

Do I dispute with the CA or CRA as inaccurate and ask for proof?

I may be out of luck since it's paid, but somehow I feel like the erroneous reporting might give me an opportunity to use the legalisites to have it removed.

I'm not sure how to approach this one. Any suggestions would be great.

Hey, try this. I suggest sending the "Cease and Desist" Letter

"FDCPA 805© CEASING COMMUNICATION. If a consumer notifies a debt collector in writing that the consumer refuses to pay a debt or that the consumer wishes the debt collector to cease further communication with the consumer, the debt collector shall not communicate further with the consumer with respect to such debt, except ..."

I believe that "Ceasing Communication" includes our Credit Reports.

At this point, there is nothing to lose. But you may gain

a $1,000 violation, if the CA#4 doesn't STOP reporting to the

Credit Bureaus. What do you think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think so, plus the FDCPA does not apply, because the FDCPA only applies to COLLECTING debts, not reporting them once they have been paid.

(3) The term "consumer" means any natural person obligated or allegedly obligated to pay any debt.

You are no longer obligated to pay a debt, because it has been paid, therefore, you are no longer a consumer under the meaning of the FDCPA. There is plenty to lose. If the court decides that this claim is without merit, you can be forced to pay the CA's legal bills.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Ahh but.. if you really wanna use the wording of the FCRA to screw them.. you can do the following.

You paid Company 5.. NOT company 4

So company 4 is reporting inaccuarate info on your credit report.. because they did not have a paid collection for you

You could try it..

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.