Jump to content

Paid OC - should I still do DV with CA?


shoe_gal
 Share

Recommended Posts

I recently had a HORRIBLE experience with a CA (Van Ru Credit Corporation). Thanks to the advice I received on this board, I decided to call the OC to see if they still owned the account. Thank God, they did! I sent a money order directly to the OC and now I have a $0 balance! I am just waiting for the "Paid in full" letter to come in the mail.

Now, my question is this: Should I still do DV with the CA, even though I paid the OC directly? The CA was very slimy on the phone with me and I don't trust them AT ALL. I am wondering if doing DV would actually encourage them to put something bad on my credit report. But, I know that I should probably do the DV anyway to protect myself. I am DEFINITELY planning on writing some complaint letters about this CA to various authorities (BBB and the FTC for starters). See these threads for my story:

1)http://www.debt-consolidation-credit-repair-service.com/forums/showthread.php?t=256251

2)http://www.debt-consolidation-credit-repair-service.com/forums/showthread.php?t=256313

The OC said that when my account was paid in full, that it would be pulled from the the CA. I asked if anything would be reported to the credit bureaus, and the OC said that it depended on the length of time, but that since I was paying so quickly, that nothing may be reported to the credit reporting bureaus. The OC said that if anyone would be reporting anything to the credit bureaus, that it would be the CA. That seemed weird to me, since I was paying the OC directly.

I just don't want any paid collections on my credit report. Don't we all? ;-)

Any thoughts, advice, or insight on my situation would be appreciated. Thanks! :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Though we all know Van Ru is beyond the lowest form of ????, don't waste your time with a DV. It will serve no purpose at this time.

What usually occurs when you pay the OC, no matter what you say, they will only notify the CA of their receipt of payment in full, and will, due to their agreement, pay the CA their percentage. The CA can legally report the TL as a paid, but, if not reporting yet, plus, based on the comment as to your paying so quickly, I doubt it will be reported. BUT, since we all know we can't trust a CA, wait for at least 60 days, then pull a CR to check. Then, if they reported, let us know and we will go from there.

To include, what you usually do is file a dispute with the CRA's and wait for the response. If it is deleted, which many times a paid is, it's gone. If not, you go after the CA for reporting a negative for something they had played no part in. Remember, a CA cannot report something they don't have. Yes, it would fall into a gray area, but, does work at times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for your advice, retmar!

So other people have also had bad experiences with Van Ru? I'd be interested to hear about that! What have you heard? Maybe I should post a separate thread about people's experiences with Van Ru. I tried searching the forums, but I got error messages saying that both "Van" and "Ru" were too short.

So basically if the CA reports anything negative to the credit bureaus, I can dispute it because the CA really had no part in it (since I paid the OC)? What would the basis of my dispute be?

What do you mean by "Remember, a CA cannot report something they don't have." Do you mean the actual payment?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Though the CA was assigned the debt by the OC, and can legally report the debt as a paid, even if payment was made to the OC, they will usually cede and delete the TL if pushed.

What I was referring to is that many CA's in the past would verify a debt even though they had already sold it again or reassigned it. They cannot do this as they can only verify a debt they are handling, BUT, they can report it as sold, transferred, or reassigned, with a zero balance. The end result is they usually delete when pushed so as to avoid any problems. Therefore, what you are doing with the dispute is tellling the CA that since they were not involved in the actual settlement, they do not have the right to report it, and, it was paid in full to the OC prior to their reporting negative information, which now demonstrates to everyone that their sole purpose of reporting this, was for the sole purpose of damaging your credit, not to assist in the paying of the debt, which can ONLY be assumed to be harassment, libel, slander, or whatever you decide to claim. You get the drift.

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.