If OC sells debt to JDB??

[MadinKS]

If an OC sells the debt to a JDB, like Arrow Financial, does the OC give up the rights to bring suit and everything else that goes with the sold debt?

[nascar]

If an OC sells the debt to a JDB, like Arrow Financial, does the OC give up the rights to bring suit and everything else that goes with the sold debt?

Yes, they do.

[hawaiiguy]

If an OC sells the debt to a JDB, like Arrow Financial, does the OC give up the rights to bring suit and everything else that goes with the sold debt?

This leads off to another question I was going to post. In my case, A GE Mastercard was sold to RJM, who is using Island National to collect for them. I DV'ed Island National and received a responce from RJM, with some statements, etc. Doesnt the OC have to respond to the DV? Or does that all change when it is sold?

[MadinKS]

Doesnt the OC have to respond to the DV? Or does that all change when it is sold?

I don't believe the OC has to respond to DV, but they do have to respond to dispute. The OC is a furnisher of information and the following statute covers their responsibilities as a furnisher. So yes, they have to respond to your dispute within the same timeframe as the CRA's.

§ 623. Responsibilities of furnishers of information to consumer reporting agencies

(8) Ability of Consumer to Dispute Information Directly with Furnisher

(E) Duty of person after receiving notice of dispute. After receiving a notice of

dispute from a consumer pursuant to subparagraph (D), the person that

provided the information in dispute to a consumer reporting agency shall--

(i) conduct an investigation with respect to the disputed information;

(ii) review all relevant information provided by the consumer with the notice;

July 30, 2004 73

(iii) complete such person's investigation of the dispute and report the

results of the investigation to the consumer before the expiration of the

period under section 611(a)(1) within which a consumer reporting

agency would be required to complete its action if the consumer had

elected to dispute the information under that section; and

(iv) if the investigation finds that the information reported was inaccurate,

promptly notify each consumer reporting agency to which the person

furnished the inaccurate information of that determination and provide

to the agency any correction to that information that is necessary to

make the information provided by the person accurate.

[nascar]

Doesnt the OC have to respond to the DV? Or does that all change when it is sold?

You must be provided with the name of the original creditor. The statute itself says nothing about who it must come from. That is set out in the common law interpretations of the statutes (case law). But even the consumer-friendly opinions out there say the information must come from the creditor, not the original creditor (someone correct me if I've mis-stated that; I haven't read those opinions in a while). The original creditor most likely would no longer be in possession of that information anyway.

[MadinKS]

But if they update your CR every month with the deliquent information, aren't they "furnishers" as far as the FCRA is concerned? If so, then you can treat them as such, and dispute their ability to furnish accurate information. Right? Or am I reading way too much into it? Just want to get the skinny on it. Thanks.

[nascar]

But if they update your CR every month with the deliquent information, aren't they "furnishers" as far as the FCRA is concerned?

Who are you referring to; the OC or the JDB or the CA?

[MadinKS]

The OC when they are still reporting, updating, and verifying.

[nascar]

The OC when they are still reporting, updating, and verifying.

KS, is the OC reporting a zero balance? If the account has been sold, they can still report, but they must show a zero balance. Are you sure the account has been sold, or are the CA's blowing smoke?

[CantCU]

I disputed a CO with the CRA for a OC...it came back verified by the JDB (got it in writing). So I wrote the CRA asking them to remove it, again, because I had no proof that the JDB has the authority to verify for the OC. EQ and TU did remove it but I am still fighting with EX. The OC never reported the CO. It only got reported by the JDB when they took over the collection attempts.

Boy have I learned a lot since I've been on this board!

[MadinKS]

Nascar-I have a couple that have gone CO but the OC is still reporting a balance and I have some that are reporting correctly. Am I reading too much into the statute to say that an OC reporting a $O balance, updating monthly, and verifying disputes is still a furnisher of information?

[nascar]

Am I reading too much into the statute to say that an OC reporting a $O balance, updating monthly, and verifying disputes is still a furnisher of information?

They can still update and verify. As long as the information is correct, they aren't doing anything wrong. Why would they bother? Who knows, but guys like Providian, WaMu, etc., are bad for doing this. Just make them report correctly, that's about all you can do.

[retmar]

Actually, once an OC sells the debt, they have no true right to report on something they do not have any dealings with. We have one of these on my DW's (falls off soon). The OC made one last report which consisted of them noting the TL as sold or transferred and a zero balance. Not one notation since.

As to the main question about the OC. The law does say that the CA must supply the name, etc. to consumer upon written request. BUT, if debt is sold, who is OC? A JDB is now owner, so is the OC, in one aspect of the claim. One would beleive that upon pruchase, the original OC would supply a complete file to the JDB, but, more times than not, they don't, so the requested information is no longer available. Yet, sometimes they have shown up when JDB approaches the seller. This is where it comes in as to IF a computer generated "List" meets the minimum of the statute. We've all heard way too many horror stories on this alone. It also comes in here as to the contracts being forged and why you do not sign your letters with your normal signature. Some have said in the past that a computer generated signature is illegal, such as from our "Works" program, but, it isn't. But, if you wish to play safe just in case someone does win on this matter, I would suggest you only sign with your initials, or last 2, with first name spelled, or however you can mix it up to where no one can truly figure your signature. Remember, many times we see things from our higher ups at work who only initial a memo or new work order, etc.

Also, I forgot to add earlier. When an OC sells the debt, they do give up all rights to debt, period. BUT, do realize that on occasion, if you speak to the OC the right way, they have cancelled the sale and allowed you to pay them directly, thus, doing away with the JDB. I did it with one who was in error as they had created two accounts for the wife.