Jump to content

Repo included in BK, BK not on CR over 10yrs old.


Recommended Posts

Long story short, my DH and I bought a new manufactured home in a respectable community park when we were in our early 20's. We lived there for 10 years with the last two showing signs of the community being run down. Thefts, B&E's, drug trafficing and much more, which we immediately put it up for sale well below what it was worth just to sell it. We have three little girls and the final straw for us was when we found out that there were 10 pedafiles in the park two of them recent releases. As soon as we found that out we dropped the price again, advertised like mad trying to sell this place. At our wits end we didnt know what to do. We didnt want to let it go back to the bank but we also didnt see any hope of selling either.

One day, the 13 year old across the street was approached by one of those known pedafiles asking her to help him find his lost puppy. Thank God she knew better. Needless to say, we moved out the following week, leaving the home to the bank and never looked back.

We filed BK in 1995, and the house was amended forgive my ignorance but I dont remember the term they used for this) so we could keep the house. When we walked away from it in 2004 it was still under the BK so they couldnt come after us for the difference from auction price.

Here is my dilema. There is a negative on DH CR for the Financial company for the house, which states it was repossessed included in BK. However, our BK dropped off in Nov 2005. How should I handle this negative on the CR with the CRA's? Should I go about it as I dont know what it is, or should I dispute it based on the fact that our BK has dropped off and this item shouldnt be on our report.

Please help!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you or didn't you reaffirm the note on the mobile home when you filed bk ?

This would have been paperwork that was sent to you by the bank, and you would have signed and had to file with the BK court. If you reaffirmed, and then walked away in 2004, then you would be liable for any deficiency after the forclosure. If you did NOT reaffirm you have NO liability.

If you did not reaffirm, then the debt for the loan would have been discharged, but you kept paying to stay in the house. It would have been written off by the bank because of the discharge, making the "delinquency" a 1995 date, and therefore should NOT be on your reports. If you reaffirmed, then first missed payments leading to forclosure would be the start of the reporting period, 2004, and will stay on your reports until 2011.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for replying :) We didnt sign any papers to reaffirm with them. Our BK lawyer said that we didnt have to inlcude it in the BK because it was a primary residence. On our credit report this is what it says:

Status: Discharged through Bankruptcy Chapter 7/Repossession

Recent Balance: $0 as of 03/2005

Debt included in Chapter 7 Bankruptcy on May 31, 2005

We filed BK in November of 1995. Based on this information, and from what you stated, then this should NOT be on our report, correct? Or am I completely off the rocker on this one.

Please correct me if I am wrong? I want to understand all of this. LOL Give me medical jargon (attending college for Sonography) I can understand everything. Give me any kind of math I can do it LOL but Legal Jargon baffles my mind. LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No this should not be on your report. It actually should have fallen off 3 years before the BK fell off. Apparently, either the CRA has made a mistake, or the furnisher has by reporting it as IIB in May 2005.

You will have to dig up your old filing paperwork and send a copy of the discharge along with the creditor listing (to show it was on the 1995 BK) to the CRA to have it removed.

Technically, the CRA is supposed to do this research themselves, but rarely do they actually do it. If you have the proof, it's best to send it along rather than rely on them to dig it up.

If it doesn't come off after showing proof, you can file suit against the CRA and/or the furnisher to force compliance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, this is one of those times it is safe to send your BK papers to the CRA, because everything on it should be legally off your reports by now.

But am I correct in understanding that you haven't even disputed it yet? This is one of those things that might even be doable by phone... sometimes if an error is this obvious, a supervisor will delete the item there and then while you're on the phone. Is this only showing on one report?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me add a few things here.

The financial institution is Greentree financial. They were in a big law suit a few years back for various things, one of them being how they dealt with collections. Second this TL was on all three reports back in 2002, however, we still lived in the home and were making payments. I disputed with the CRA's for late payments that GreenTree was reporting and they verified but deleted the late payments.

In Nov 2004 we left the manufactured home, moved out and rented a house because of all the crime that I stated in my original post. We didnt realize at that time that the home would be included in BK. We never received any letters from them or anything about the home, auction price or anything. Which legally they are suppose to supply us with that information if they are going to come after us for the difference. In April of 2005, I ran our CR's and this TL was on there, but all three CRA.

Ok fast forward to present. I got copies of reports, all but TU because they are saying that there were too many login attempts, we call CS and they say we will get an email with the new password in 3 -5 minutes, 3 days later NO password but did get an email saying there were too many login attempts. Anyway, this TL is on EX but not EQ and I have no idea about TU.

I hope this helps clear things up a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, first dispute the incorrect dates on the tradeline, it is clearly wrong. As already stated, this is one where it's ok to send in your discharge papers to prove the bk was in 1995 -- and it should NOT be on your reports.

Second, to clarify, there is no such thing as not including a debt in bk. By law, ALL debts MUST be included. You did not reaffirm the mortgage so the debt was discharged.

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.