sheekom Posted August 28, 2007 Report Share Posted August 28, 2007 I was sued by a credit card company and the case was dismissed by the judge apparently for no prosecution was present there. They had reported as charge off in my credit report before court case. My questions are:1. Can I ask credit bureaus to remove this Charge-off item from my report as the case was dismissed ?2. Can the credit card company or collection agency sue me again for the same debt ? Could something like protection under double jeopardy apply here ?I would appreciate any help or information in this regard.sheekom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aunieandreg Posted August 28, 2007 Report Share Posted August 28, 2007 What I did was write a simple removal letter stating that you were suedby this company and the case was dismissed and send them a copy ofthe case. Should be able to get a copy off of the internet under yourcounty court. TR and EQ deleted right away. Good luckIn case they wont take your documentation write on the letterthe case # and the court address so they can search the web themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moriah4 Posted August 28, 2007 Report Share Posted August 28, 2007 Congrats on the dismissal! Always glad to hear that we can prevail in court if it goes that far. Good Luck getting them removed from your reports! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigjohnstud4200 Posted August 28, 2007 Report Share Posted August 28, 2007 Congrats on the dismissal! Always glad to hear that we can prevail in court if it goes that far. Good Luck getting them removed from your reports! if the dismissal was with prejudice then they can't sue you again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Methuss Posted August 28, 2007 Report Share Posted August 28, 2007 Double jeapordy applies only in criminal cases, not civil. They can sue you over and over until the claim is dismissed with prejudice. You can ask the judge to dismiss with predjudice if they were a no-show, but it maybe too late now...depends on your local rules.A claim dismissed with prejudice usually means they have to remove it from your reports because a judge has ruled their claim is without merit. Any reporting thereafter or "verifying" by the furnisher would be a flat-out violation of the FCRAs prohibition on reporting inaccurate information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheekom Posted August 28, 2007 Author Report Share Posted August 28, 2007 The judge order said the case was dismissed for want of prosecution. It means that plaintiff did not have their lawyers present at the hearing. What does that mean to me ? can they try and sue again ? Can the negative credit information still be removed my report forever ?Any answers would be greatly appreciated.sheekom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Methuss Posted August 28, 2007 Report Share Posted August 28, 2007 Yes. It means they can try to sue you again. If they repeatedly (like 3 times or more) sue you and not show up, you can ask the judge that the claim be dismissed with prejudice because they are harassing you and wasting the court's time. Until a judge dismisses their claim with prejudice they can continue to keep it on your credit report. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myscoresawful Posted August 29, 2007 Report Share Posted August 29, 2007 First of all, how old is this debt? Since you state it was charged off before going to court, sounds like it could be one that was getting kind of old anyway, and so could it be possible that the SOL has expired and the prosecution didn't bother showing up when they considered the time that would be wasted?If they did not dismiss with prejudice, and the SOL has expired, they can still come back and sue, but your defense for a dismissal will be the expired SOL.It feels good to get a dismissal, doesn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigjohnstud4200 Posted August 29, 2007 Report Share Posted August 29, 2007 First of all, how old is this debt? Since you state it was charged off before going to court, sounds like it could be one that was getting kind of old anyway, and so could it be possible that the SOL has expired and the prosecution didn't bother showing up when they considered the time that would be wasted?If they did not dismiss with prejudice, and the SOL has expired, they can still come back and sue, but your defense for a dismissal will be the expired SOL.It feels good to get a dismissal, doesn't it? There's a possibility that the SOL tolled during the court filing through dismissal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myscoresawful Posted August 29, 2007 Report Share Posted August 29, 2007 Methuss, I'm looking at the court document from when Cap 1 dropped suit against me and I asked the judge to dismiss it with prejudice.The "Judgement for" blank is not filled in, but down at the bottom there are these options:Dismissed - Cost taxed to Plaintiff/Defendent (this is the option the judge selected and circled "Plaintiff" as the party to pay court cost)Non-Suit - Cost taxed to Plaintiff/Defendent DefaultContestedAgreed Isn't the Non-Suit the one that would have been selected if it was without prejudice? Would it show on the court document if it was dismissed with prejudice? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myscoresawful Posted August 29, 2007 Report Share Posted August 29, 2007 There's a possibility that the SOL tolled during the court filing through dismissal.ok, now you really got me confused ...doesn't tolled basically mean started over? a dismissal would do that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigjohnstud4200 Posted August 29, 2007 Report Share Posted August 29, 2007 Methuss, I'm looking at the court document from when Cap 1 dropped suit against me and I asked the judge to dismiss it with prejudice.The "Judgement for" blank is not filled in, but down at the bottom there are these options:Dismissed - Cost taxed to Plaintiff/Defendent (this is the option the judge selected and circled "Plaintiff" as the party to pay court cost)Non-Suit - Cost taxed to Plaintiff/Defendent DefaultContestedAgreed Isn't the Non-Suit the one that would have been selected if it was without prejudice? Would it show on the court document if it was dismissed with prejudice?Non-suit is generally without prejudiceok, now you really got me confused ...doesn't tolled basically mean started over? a dismissal would do that?tolling means that it's stopped, but not restarted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myscoresawful Posted August 29, 2007 Report Share Posted August 29, 2007 Non-suit is generally without prejudicetolling means that it's stopped, but not restarted.oh, hmm...I had the SOL things backwards....thanks!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheekom Posted August 29, 2007 Author Report Share Posted August 29, 2007 The case they filed was within SOL (would expire 18 months from now). What I gather from this discussion is that until judge dismisses with prejudice, they can come back again. The judge order had a list of about 50 or so cases which he dismissed all for want of execution and charged the court fees to plaintiff. My option would be now, I guess, to write to credit agencies to remove this my credit report. If they do, good, if not and go on technicality, well ,I will wait until SOL expires or try to settle out. I will take "wait and see" approach with them while pursuing with CR agencies to remove the entry. It would not hurt, Would it ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts