7 YO unpaid judgement

[2beDebtFreeinRI]

..Hi.I'm new to these forums..I've been working on repairing my credit and I'm doing pretty well..I have a CC from Navy Federal, Chase and Macy's and they are in good standing. My Fico is hovering between 640-650 .Any old debts are paid and off of my credit with the exception of one judgement..It it from California, from a department store and is for 2500$. It is unpaid and is almost 7 years old. It will be 7 years old July 1st. .I am currently residing in RI. Does the california SOL apply to it or the RI SOL? I don't know if I should pay it or if that will make it newly active and increase the SOl.. I guess my questionsare ,does it benefit me to pay it ,and how much longer will it be reported on my credit report

[bigjohnstud4200]

..Hi.I'm new to these forums..I've been working on repairing my credit and I'm doing pretty well..I have a CC from Navy Federal, Chase and Macy's and they are in good standing. My Fico is hovering between 640-650 .Any old debts are paid and off of my credit with the exception of one judgement..It it from California, from a department store and is for 2500$. It is unpaid and is almost 7 years old. It will be 7 years old July 1st. .I am currently residing in RI. Does the california SOL apply to it or the RI SOL? I don't know if I should pay it or if that will make it newly active and increase the SOl.. I guess my questionsare ,does it benefit me to pay it ,and how much longer will it be reported on my credit report

I don't know much about judgements but I believe you are stuck with a 10 year judgment in California (renewable at 10).

[Ahntara]

It's always best to go to the source.

The FCRA regulates information that appears on your credit report.

FCRA Title 15 USC 1681c Section 605(a)(2) "Information excluded from consumer reports...civil judgments...that from date of entry antedate the report by more than seven years..."

SOL is state law. It regulates other aspects of debt, like whether a lawsuit is viable and the ramifications of that suit should judgment be granted.

"...should I pay it or if that will make it newly active and increase the SOl..."

To pay or not to pay is up to you.

The impact of paying on SOL depends on the specific state law (you said it was from California) which governs this judgment. Since it already exists as a legally granted judgment and Public Record, a safe assumption is that the SOL is established and would not be changed by payment (unlike a collection ACCOUNT...in some states paying or making arrangements to pay can reset SOL). To be certain, you should read CA statutes or consult an attorney.

Many consumers are confused by Public Records. They require not only payment but a proper legal disposition. Many legal items are recorded in PR at your local courthouse. Only a few of them appear on your CR.

The real tickle with legals is that they impact more than just your CR. Judgments can attach to any real property you own or purchase during their legal 'lifetime'. Depending on state law, the plaintiff may seize bank accounts, garnish wages and/or renew the judgment. All of this may take place after the judgment has disappeared from your CR and should be considered prior to making a decision. I wish you luck!

[2beDebtFreeinRI]

You know, I'm not sure if this is paid or not...The status says unknown..When I went to court the company tried to get a judgement for 2 accounts ,both with the same card. the judge said no, you get one judgement for 2500 or this gets dropped..They took the 2500.

A year later I contacted them to pay,set up a payment plan,paid it off and thought I was done.. A couple years later they contacted me again saying that I owed a second amount...I think they were trying to get around the original judgement .. I had the judgement plus the accounts listed a second time as a charge off(paid,was past due) ..

I should contact San Diego county,but I'm afraid too

This is what exuifax says

Court of law [?] Not reported

Case number [?] 180VC03284

Date filed [?] Jul 01, 2000

Status [?] Not on Record

Amount [?] $2,500

Plaintiff [?] Not reported

Defendant [?] Not reported

[bigjohnstud4200]

It's always best to go to the source.

The FCRA regulates information that appears on your credit report.

FCRA Title 15 USC 1681c Section 605(a)(2) "Information excluded from consumer reports...civil judgments...that from date of entry antedate the report by more than seven years..."

SOL is state law. It regulates other aspects of debt, like whether a lawsuit is viable and the ramifications of that suit should judgment be granted.

"...should I pay it or if that will make it newly active and increase the SOl..."

To pay or not to pay is up to you.

The impact of paying on SOL depends on the specific state law (you said it was from California) which governs this judgment. Since it already exists as a legally granted judgment and Public Record, a safe assumption is that the SOL is established and would not be changed by payment (unlike a collection ACCOUNT...in some states paying or making arrangements to pay can reset SOL). To be certain, you should read CA statutes or consult an attorney.

Many consumers are confused by Public Records. They require not only payment but a proper legal disposition. Many legal items are recorded in PR at your local courthouse. Only a few of them appear on your CR.

The real tickle with legals is that they impact more than just your CR. Judgments can attach to any real property you own or purchase during their legal 'lifetime'. Depending on state law, the plaintiff may seize bank accounts, garnish wages and/or renew the judgment. All of this may take place after the judgment has disappeared from your CR and should be considered prior to making a decision. I wish you luck!

After thinking about it, I believe the reporting period is still 7 years, however, I believe they can still collect from you per state law.

[2beDebtFreeinRI]

Ok..more questions here.. My judgement looks like this on equifax..It's not on the other two credit agencies.

Court of law [?] Not reported

Case number [?] 180VC03284

Date filed [?] Jul 01, 2000

Status [?] Not on Record

Amount [?] $2,500

Plaintiff [?] Not reported

Defendant [?] Not reported

There is no info on here beyond the amount...It doesn't even name the state the judgement was in ,who the creditor is ,whether it's paid or unpaid etc... Can I dispute on these grounds?

If in Ca it is legal to keep this on my report for 10 years is equifax even going to know this , seeing there is no info at all on where this judgement is from?

[Ahntara]

"...Can I dispute on these grounds..."

You can dispute on any basis you wish. But absence of the data you mentioned is not a reason for removal. It seems likely that a dispute sent on that basis will cause the info to get added, rather than get the entry removed (since it's a legal item. CRA's take those a little more seriously than a TL).

FYI: The 'case number' you listed is actually a bureau code. That tells insiders the court/state of jurisdiction. So the entry really isn't absent all the data you think it is.

Since this is so close to falling off on it's own, you may wish to leave it be until that time. 3 mos. is not a lot of time to wait for a PR to disappear, unless you have a need for it to be gone sooner. The decision is up to you. I would just hate to see this monster awakened so close to RP expiration.

"...Ca (California)...legal to keep this...10 years...is equifax even going to know this..."

Great question. Also the subject of much debate here.

The FCRA says "...seven years or until the governing statute of limitations has expired, whichever is the longer period..."

So, technicially, LEGALLY, the item may remain for however long it is valid, according to individual state law. REALISTICALLY, the CRA's and their monkeys barely know federal law, much less state law. They don't want to take on consumers if they don't have to and follow FCRA (to the best of their limited ability) guidelines. I've NEVER seen a PR appear longer than federal guidelines and even when they do (like an unpaid 11-yr-old tax lien) that item came off easily with a letter of dispute.

IMO, your PR will fall off at 7 years regardless of state SOL time lines. As I stated before, IF the judgment is still valid there are implications beyond your CR that will stay in effect for the full duration.

[2beDebtFreeinRI]

"...Can I dispute on these grounds..."

You can dispute on any basis you wish. But absence of the data you mentioned is not a reason for removal. It seems likely that a dispute sent on that basis will cause the info to get added, rather than get the entry removed (since it's a legal item. CRA's take those a little more seriously than a TL).

FYI: The 'case number' you listed is actually a bureau code. That tells insiders the court/state of jurisdiction. So the entry really isn't absent all the data you think it is.

Since this is so close to falling off on it's own, you may wish to leave it be until that time. 3 mos. is not a lot of time to wait for a PR to disappear, unless you have a need for it to be gone sooner. The decision is up to you. I would just hate to see this monster awakened so close to RP expiration.

"...Ca (California)...legal to keep this...10 years...is equifax even going to know this..."

Great question. Also the subject of much debate here.

The FCRA says "...seven years or until the governing statute of limitations has expired, whichever is the longer period..."

So, technicially, LEGALLY, the item may remain for however long it is valid, according to individual state law. REALISTICALLY, the CRA's and their monkeys barely know federal law, much less state law. They don't want to take on consumers if they don't have to and follow FCRA (to the best of their limited ability) guidelines. I've NEVER seen a PR appear longer than federal guidelines and even when they do (like an unpaid 11-yr-old tax lien) that item came off easily with a letter of dispute.

IMO, your PR will fall off at 7 years regardless of state SOL time lines. As I stated before, IF the judgment is still valid there are implications beyond your CR that will stay in effect for the full duration.

Ok, this is good info thanks... What i was planning to do was to leave it alone at least through July.. If it falls of, great.No problem..If it looks like it's going to hang on for 3 more years I'll reevaluate.. At least it's only on one CR

ETA,,I just wish I knew if this was paid in full or not..As I menioned I contacted the company in 2003 and set up and made payments..I paid what they said I owed and then 2 years later they asked for more..This was very confusing.. I can't be garnished(i don't think ) as I'm a 100 % disabled veteran with a VA pension..I don't think they can mess with that

[direred]

Actually, there's some wrong info here.

Note the full phrasing for judgments:

(2)Civil suits, civil judgments, and records of arrest that from date of entry, antedate the report by more than seven years or until the governing statute of limitations has expired, whichever is the longer period.

Judgment SOL in California is 10 years. Judgments can also be renewed, which means they'll be re-reported.

[Ahntara]

State SOL laws pre-date the Fair Credit Reporting Act by decades (at the least) because they concern property. The propensity of judgments attaching to real property along with the other provisions for recovering money owed was the 'intent' behind SOL and is their working area of influence. They do NOT address information appearing on a credit report. This aspect is covered by federal law for purposes of uniformity.

So, even though a California judgment MAY appear, legally, on a consumer file for the full period of validity. It will be shielded from view after SEVEN years.

If you believe differently, POST THE STATUTE, instead of an opinion with no supporting evidence. I'm willing to be educated. Show me an example of state law which specifically addresses credit reporting and I'll concede this point.

"...Judgments can also be renewed, which means they'll be re-reported."

Is this an opinion? Or are there examples/case law which addresses this? I think this is a possibility, but one easily addressed by disputing the legal as time barred. Lots of things are possible. CRA policies and procedures are that judgments are shielded from view after 7 years from their original date of adjudication. The same is true for Chp 13 BK, which legally (specifically according to the FCRA) may appear for 10 years, are standardly shielded from view after 7.

[Ahntara]

.

[2beDebtFreeinRI]

Just letting you guys know that this judgement has fallen off my report and I got a 7 pt increase...It would have been on for 7 years in July and is from Cali, which has a 10 year statute...I have no idea why it dropped... I did dispute it as paid early this week and it was gone in hours

[dogtgra11]

I HAD A JUDGEMENT ON ME IN 1988 IT CAN LAST A LIFE TIME , I GOT IT SET ASIDE BECAUSE I DID NOT GET THE PAPER WORK .