What are the reasons collection agencies will not accept a PFD?

[Jason]

I am wondering why if they are paid in full ;and they got what they want; what is the problem?

Do they lose money for taking the debt off our credit reports?

Do the collection agencies look bad for taking off our debt to the credit bureaus?

PS. I talked to a collection agency manager today. He stated he has contracts with all three credit bureaus. "Out of all three of them: 2 require him to not remove account after they are paid in full and one credit bureau really doesn't care." I asked him which CB did not care. And he avoided the question. I am wondering if this is true; and what he said was true.

[stefdr]

The toads at collection agencies have a Napoleon Complex. They like to feel they wield power and control over those they are collecting from. If you look at their forums they discuss how they don't feel you deserve to have a clean credit report, and that you need to be punished somehow for not paying on time. I told one in a settlement offer letter that he needed to come down off his high horse thinking he was one of the noble protectors of the credit scoring system. If he wanted to settle, it would be on my terms. Their refusal of my terms would be taken by me as a refusal to settle on their part, not a refusal to pay on mine.

[Jason]

Ha-ha! You have courage! Good for you! :lol:

[stefdr]

I know we shouldn't talk to them on the phone, but I like to at least get through a couple of phone calls with them first. They at first assume I'm going to be one of the scared rabbits they can intimidate, but by the end of the calls I usually have them so frustrated they are yelling and swearing at me. I refuse to budge worse they they do. They try to tell me all they can do is have me pay and it will show as a paid collection, and I tell them PFD or showing as paid as agreed, closed; and those were the only options they had. They tell me they can't do that knowing full well they can, they just don't want to. After a bit of shouting on their part, I tell them it now has to be a PFD, period. As frustrated as they try to get me, I just get them pissed. They can't stand someone they can't intimidate.

[ABaldbrotha]

I like your style, I too find it entertaining talking to them on the phone. I start laughing and they just get heated.

________

New relationship advice dicussion

Edited May 15, 2011 by ABaldbrotha

[nascar]

As frustrated as they try to get me, I just get them pissed. They can't stand someone they can't intimidate.

That IS fun, isn't it!

[Amerikaner83]

yes...it can make a boring day quite entertaining.

[whocares]

Crusing a collectors forum one time I saw a poster and a thread about this.

One person said their company made it a point to never PFD, they downright did not update the tradeline if they did promise PFD, the reason he gave made sense...he said my company makes money collecting...how can we prove our collections and recoveries if we delete the collection fron the CR...it was like a status symbol, saying see we got them to pay...we can do your hard to pay clients too...

another poster said his company made a point of putting the pay off amount in the settlement TL, especially if they sued and made lots of money.

Another guy confessed he had made secret deals with customers for an extra 100.00 he would make sure the TL was deleted...he said many paid and he never deleted...

So you see even incorrect and bad debt are worth money...in one way or another...

[nascar]

Crusing a collectors forum one time I saw a poster and a thread about this.

One person said their company made it a point to never PFD, they downright did not update the tradeline if they did promise PFD, the reason he gave made sense...he said my company makes money collecting...how can we prove our collections and recoveries if we delete the collection fron the CR...it was like a status symbol, saying see we got them to pay...we can do your hard to pay clients too...

another poster said his company made a point of putting the pay off amount in the settlement TL, especially if they sued and made lots of money.

Another guy confessed he had made secret deals with customers for an extra 100.00 he would make sure the TL was deleted...he said many paid and he never deleted...

So you see even incorrect and bad debt are worth money...in one way or another...

So, the debt collector is inferring that he shares consumers' credit reports with potential customers as evidence that his company is effective?

[willingtocope]

Back to the OP:

PS. I talked to a collection agency manager today. He stated he has contracts with all three credit bureaus. "Out of all three of them: 2 require him to not remove account after they are paid in full and one credit bureau really doesn't care." I asked him which CB did not care. And he avoided the question. I am wondering if this is true; and what he said was true.

The contract between "credit reporter" (OC, CA, JDB) and "credit agency" does indeed prohibit the credit reporter from deleting tradelines unless they have made a "legitimate" mistake in reporting in the first place. The whole premise of the CRAs is that they show a debtors complete credit history. If accurate TLs get deleted, they've lost some of their credibility. There is no law that requires someone to report...and no law that prevents someone from deleting what they reported previously. Its just that if a CA does too much of it, they may lose their ability to report in the first place.

Which is why many CAs now say "no we won't delete"...but...if you dispute it after you pay it, "we won't validate it".

[Fairy Enchantress]

nicely stated above me.

[hipsociety]

Are you kidding me? "The whole premise of the CRAs is that they show a debtors complete credit history".

If a collection is paid, then it shouldn't be held against that person any longer. After 7 years the account is removed...Isn't removing it after 7 years hiding a consumers full credit history? Using your reasoning, everything EVER put on a credit report should remain, otherwise their full history is not being known to potential creditors. Theirs an SOL for a reason, and there's not legitimate reason why a paid account should remain on a report longer than necessary.

I think PFD is a great tool CA's should use to get people to pay their debts!

[nascar]

I don't have anything to back up my position ... yet, but IMO ANY tradeline inserted by a debt collector should be removed when paid.

The debt collector uses the CRA as a tool to get the debtor to pay. They have NO other reason. Once that reason is gone, the reason for furnishing info to the CRA is also gone. The original creditor - the one who extended credit to the consumer in the first place - should be the ONLY one whose tradeline can remain on a credit report for historical purposes.

IMO, the CA has no right to continue to what amounts to collection efforts (remember, that's why they furnished the info in the first place) once the debt is paid. My position on is that they are continuing damage you when they no longer have a legimate cause for doing so. I'm looking for a good opportunity to try this approach but I don't have anyone on my credit report to use it against. I guess thats a good thing.

[Krash]

where are these so called CA's forums? I hate them

[Amerikaner83]

virtualRN started a thread called "CA Forums". search for it -

[Krash]

omg, u mean they are on the site posting?

[Amerikaner83]

search for the thread titled "CA Forums".

[Fozzle]

I don't have anything to back up my position ... yet, but IMO ANY tradeline inserted by a debt collector should be removed when paid.

The debt collector uses the CRA as a tool to get the debtor to pay. They have NO other reason. Once that reason is gone, the reason for furnishing info to the CRA is also gone. The original creditor - the one who extended credit to the consumer in the first place - should be the ONLY one whose tradeline can remain on a credit report for historical purposes.

IMO, the CA has no right to continue to what amounts to collection efforts (remember, that's why they furnished the info in the first place) once the debt is paid. My position on is that they are continuing damage you when they no longer have a legimate cause for doing so. I'm looking for a good opportunity to try this approach but I don't have anyone on my credit report to use it against. I guess thats a good thing.

I disagree with this one, but only referring to accurate, legitimate reporting. True that a debt collector can use the CRA as a tool to get the debtor to pay, but they are still providing a true picture of a person's credit history. The reason that you say is missing is it's part of a person's credit/debt profile, and can be reported as part of the overall credit picture. The CA's entry can show how long it took to pay off the collection/chargeoff (couple of months? Three years?), whether it was paid in full or settled for a fraction, etc.

If CAs removed the entry upon payment, then by the same token, creditors would remove good tradelines when they are closed by the consumer or installment loans when they are paid at the end of the term. Two sides of the same coin, as I see it.