Jump to content

"We cant do that"


tigwelder32920
 Share

Recommended Posts

I called 3 0f the 4 OC's this week and after playin' phone transfer tag for a while, I came to the same type of final answer from all 3. That is "...well we can have you pay the rest of the balance and well tell the CA to mark it paid in full rather than settlement reached...which is what I have now. When asked to have the entry removed they all said "WE CANT DO THAT"

I'm not even close to giving up but, I need to figure out my next move.

Any idea's?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It happens. I have ONE CA left on my bureau. It is for a medical bill of $758. The doc's office screwed up the insurance filing so they COULD have been paid! I offered to PIF if they would pull it back from the CA and have it deleted.

The office manager said,"I talked to the CA and we can't do that" and, of course I replied with,"Yes, you can. All you have to do is tell them that you sent it in error. That's it. They are worse than used car salesmen and they won't tell you this is OK because they won't get thier cut!" Anyway it boiled down to her unwillingness to do this. I told her that she wouldn't get paid. She started to laugh before I told her that it is out of SOL so she can't go after me legally. She was like,"WHAT?! You mean all I have to do is not pay my bills for 3 years and they can't come after me for it any more?!" Yes, as long as they don't sue in the 3 years...but your credit report will reflect your non-payment.

So here I sit....it has been since 4/2002 when my daughter was treated. In April it will be 2 years since SOL (in SC) ran out and 2 years until deletion. They had an opportunity to get the money. They were more concerned with my black mark on my credit report than getting paid.

Idiots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if the exec's at the OC know how unconcearned their staff is about bringing in money owe'd. I just get the feeling that they are more interested in ending the phone call ASAP.

One of the many down sides to the "customer service phone banks" (even the ones that are still here in the states) is that their performance is measured by "number of calls per hour" rather than "quality of call". So, the exec's know.

However, its not clear from you post as to who the OC's are...and if the accounts are still owned by the OC. In general, as long as the OC still owns it, once its been paid, then any CA involved no longer has any reason to put a TL on your CRs...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However, its not clear from you post as to who the OC's are...and if the accounts are still owned by the OC. In general, as long as the OC still owns it, once its been paid, then any CA involved no longer has any reason to put a TL on your CRs...

The accounts are owned by the CA's now....it's been over 4 years. The OC's are just the cable company and sprint. The entire debt combined was only $650. I paid sprint earlier this year and now they wont budge, but I'm a current customer of the cable company again and have never missed a payment in the 2 years that I've had it. They just dont care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, then then I'm still confused. Who's reporting what?

You say you paid sprint? How are they reporting?

Is some CA reporting? If the OC sold the account, then the OC's report should say "written off/sold to another lender" with a $0 balance...and...they no longer have any control over the account or over what the CA (really a "junk debt buyer"...different animal) is reporting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, tigwelder, it would be helpful to have a complete description as to how the TL is reporting (you can even do a cut and paste, deleting private into). Are both the original OC and the CA reporting? If so, we'll need to know how each is reporting. As has been said above, if the OC has sold the account then their TL must report a $0 balance and "account transferred/sold" as the status. If they charged off the account before selling it then they can also note that in their TL. If the OC sold the account then they have no control over what the CA/JDB reports. If a known CA is reporting then it will be apparent to potential lenders that it is a CA account, so even if it reports as "paid in full" it is still a paid collection, which doesn't help your FICO.

The good news is that after four years this negative TL is not doing your FICO much damage. When did you first go delinquent on the account? That is the date you go by when determining when the TL will fall of your reports (assuming you never brought the account current after that first delinquency). If the account is now owned by a CA/JDB then my recommendation would be to periodically dispute the negative TL with the CRAs. My guess is that it will disappear before the seven-year mark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

COLLECTION COMPANY OF AMER

Agency Address: 700 Longwater Dr

Norwell, MA 020611624

(877) 295-0142

Date Reported: 12/2006

Date Assigned: 07/2006

Creditor Classification: Cable/Cellular

Creditor Name: SPRINT PCS

Accounts Number: 177XXXX

Account Owner: Individual Account.

Original Amount Owned: $206

Date of 1 st Delinquency: 01/2003

Balance Date: 12/2006

Balance Owned: $0

Last Payment Date: 27/12/2006

Status Date: 12/2006

Status: P - Paid

Comments: Settlement accepted on this account

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"...after four years...not doing your FICO much damage..."

That comment was based on data posted by the OP. The TL itself shows that this is having maximum negative impact on his scores.

From the OP: "...The entire debt...was only $650...I paid...now they won't budge...I'm a current customer...never missed a payment..."

None of this matters. The accounts on your CR are closed, defaulted accounts. The only connection they have to your current account is the same two parties in the service contract. Since the past and present accounts are unconnected, why WOULD they care?

I don't know if this TL has been updated in response to a dispute, or if this CA updating out of policy. But, without the CA's agreement to remove, your only chance of removal will be due to an inaccuracy. Is ABSOLUTELY everything in the TL correct? What about that "Last Payment Date"?

Another idea is to try the honey vs. vinegar approach. GW letters and requesting an oversight in updating (equals deletion) sometimes yield the results we seek.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a good example but not because of the possible typo.

Deductions are triggered off of any info in multiple fields PLUS the "Date Last Reported". So anything in the TL that indicates derogatory status (Date of First DELINQUENCY, Settlement notations, the rating= I9 or R9) and the fact that the TL has been reported within the last 12 mos. means this is hurting his score significantly.

Negative is a negative is a negative. What dings is negative PLUS recent (status date). If this TL becomes a paid in full derog, rather than a settled derog, his score would benefit very little.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you intend to pay it in full, ask for a workout plan that includes "reaging" the account. The way that works is you make 3 payments under a workout plan and they agree to return the account to open current status. It will not remove past late-pay info, but it will remove charge-off status completely.

This is perfectly legal and does not violate any contracts with the bureaus. OCs are allowed to do this and it's even defined in the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency's regulations as a permissible way to handle delinquent accounts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"...after four years...not doing your FICO much damage..."

That comment was based on data posted by the OP. The TL itself shows that this is having maximum negative impact on his scores.

You're right in that I posted the statement that after four years the negative TL was not doing much damage. However, upon actually seeing how the TL reads I can see that while the date of first delinquency was in January 2003, the rest of the TL has been updated to 2006 so yes, unfortunately, it's still taking a bite out of the OP's FICO.

tigwelder: You say you paid off this account sometime in early 2006? Then it would seem that the reporting of a 12/27/06 last payment date is wrong. I would attack the TL on those grounds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

tigwelder: You say you paid off this account sometime in early 2006? Then it would seem that the reporting of a 12/27/06 last payment date is wrong. I would attack the TL on those grounds.

Ya, I noticed that too. I was waiting for my other disputes to return before I started more. However, I will send an online dispute tonight. I have Equifax's service and also My fico. I think my work is starting to pay off as I was approved for membership at a local credit union and also a secured CC with a fairly low rate. I also have an installment loan from another local bank, but that was granted because my brother is dating the bank manager and she listen's to me when I tell her about my troubles with my credit and ...as she put it "It's not that bad, It just needs some positive accounts". I took the money from the loan and deposited it in the credit union and wont touch it untill the loan is paid off at the end of this year. I hope it will help my score to reach a higher level and then I'm going for a mortage.

This forum is a great way for me to spend my time while I wait for the future. Thanks for having me.:D

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.