Cable company violates restrictive endorsement agreement

[lossuzy]

I had a comcast cable collections on my credit report that I wanted to get removed. I wrote them a letter with a restrictive endorsement that I've posted below. They removed the collection from TU and EQ, but not EX. So I waited a few months because I couldn't get EX to reinvestigate. I finally got them to investigate and the cable company verified the debt. What do I do now. They violated our agreement correct?

Here's an excerpt from the letter:

So this is notice that I will be sending the full payment check with a Restrictive Endorsement. It will read:

You, (“you” means Time Warner Cable), may use only this check to obtain funds from me, (“me”, “my” means **my name**), and you are strictly prohibited from using any other system, procedure, or scheme to withdraw funds from my account, and that by cashing this check you agree that you will NOT verify, re-verify re-report or update information regarding any of my accounts to the following credit reporting agencies, Experian, Equifax and Trans Union, for any reason except to delete these trade lines (items) from my credit reports. You agree, that both parties must agree upon any changes made to this agreement by initialing beside the strike-thru, before a strike-thru can be made valid. You agree that you have been given ample notice of this restrictive endorsement. You agree that failure to follow thru with the above provisions will result in a charge to Time Warner Cable, equal to the amount of this check.

[sgip2000]

I've come to the conclusion that EX does all their verification in-house.

[myscoresawful]

Did they send you anything in writing agreeing to remove?

I actually got a new CC in the mail last week and there is a clause in the terms of agreement that states if I send them any kind of payment with a RE on it, that they can cash it and it will NOT take away their rights to collect any remaining monies..etc.

Just because it was removed from the others, without their written agreement, they wouldn't be violating probably.

Hopefully it will come off EX too.

[lossuzy]

I specifically wrote this line in the letter - "and that by cashing this check you agree that you will NOT verify, re-verify re-report or update information regarding any of my accounts to the following credit reporting agencies, Experian, Equifax and Trans Union, for any reason except to delete these trade lines (items) from my credit reports. "

I thought that I made it clear that if they cash the check they could not update any information in my credit reports.

[lossuzy]

I've come to the conclusion that EX does all their verification in-house.

LOL!! I bet they ask the person sitting next to them to verify the account!!!

[hiblues]

was that RE printed on the back of the check?

also,

have you contacted the OC/CA?

Is the collection in house?

either way,

a nice but firm letter to may be in order....

explain what happened and that you hope that this was an innocent and simple over sight

because you would hate to be forced to proceed with legal actions. yada yada yada

[Ahntara]

RE typically needs an Accord and Satisfaction in order to become valid. The conditions under which RE applies is established by state law. Does your state allow RE? I ask because generally you have to do more than just type text onto a check to execute a RE.

[lossuzy]

RE typically needs an Accord and Satisfaction in order to become valid. The conditions under which RE applies is established by state law. Does your state allow RE? I ask because generally you have to do more than just type text onto a check to execute a RE.

I don't know if my state allows RE. I'm in California. I guess I'll have to find that out.

[lossuzy]

was that RE printed on the back of the check?

also,

have you contacted the OC/CA?

Is the collection in house?

either way,

a nice but firm letter to may be in order....

explain what happened and that you hope that this was an innocent and simple over sight

because you would hate to be forced to proceed with legal actions. yada yada yada

I think the collection is in house. I remember calling Time Warner and they put me through to the collections department.

I'm going to try sending a letter. Thanks so much for the advice.

[hiblues]

RE are legally enforceable in Cali but you are supposed to give them

at least 15 days notice.. however, the RE did say that

You agree that you have been given ample notice of this restrictive endorsement.

also

they have deleted the TL from your 2 other CRA's.

I'm sure all they need is a little nudge 'reminder' call or letter from you.

Trust me, they don't want to go to court to defend themselves on such a piddly case.

and a nice but firm threat of legal action will make it disappear.

[lossuzy]

RE are legally enforceable in Cali but you are supposed to give them

at least 15 days notice.. however, the RE did say that

also

they have deleted the TL from your 2 other CRA's.

I'm sure all they need is a little nudge 'reminder' call or letter from you.

Trust me, they don't want to go to court to defend themselves on such a piddly case.

and a nice but firm threat of legal action will make it disappear.

Thanks for the advice. I hope it works!

[razr]

You could also file a complaint with the BBB.

-r

[mayormyk]

I am battling with TWC also and in my research in trying to get them to go away I read their "policies" section on their website. In the policies it states that by having service agree that restrictive endorsements are not valid.....

SUCKS......

I am about to sue their collection agencies and them. If they dont get it straight, Im takin'm down! I've had it......

[2001Badyear]

Similiar debate came up on another thread concerning A&S. Good answer below from kb9tbq. Not sure how the original contract language impacts this though.

http://debt-consolidation-credit-repair-service.com/forums/showthread.php?t=280873

------------------------------------------------------------------

#7 Today, 09:52 AM

kb9tbq

ex credit bureau employee

4000+ Posts Join Date: Dec 2002

Location: Illinois

Posts: 4,759

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:

RESTRICTIVE ENDORSEMENTS (RE)

There are 2 types of A&S that I will discuss here, one is for PAYMENT IN FULL on an account and the other is simply for PAYMENT in return for an action on their part. In order to offer a payment in full A&S, the payment should be a good faith payment. You will have to determine that amount but do not even think a judge will agree with $25.00 on a $5000.00 account. You must be very careful in the way your A&S is worded on the letter and on the actual instrument of accord (check or money order). In order for A&S to work completely and for it to stand up in court (if necessary) it must be determined that both parties agreed on it and that the A&S now supercedes any previous contract that may have existed between you and the CA, DC or Creditor.

The other type of A&S is for those of us who simply want our credit reports cleaned up quickly in order to qualify for a home or car. This A&S is a payment on the account, can be as little as $25.00 and requests that the DC, CA or Creditor request deletion of the account upon accepting the A&S (or even just update the account to a positive status). This works best with credit card companies and original creditors as they process payments en masse and very rarely pay attention to accompanying letters wit payments.

A&S is an ART form and must be treated very delicately. Some states allow CA, DC and Creditors to mark through a CE and write "under protest" or "without prejudice" and it voids the A&S completely, those states are listed below:

Alabama

Massachusetts

Missouri

New York

Rhode Island

South Dakota

Wisconsin

Delaware

Minnesota

New Hampshire

Ohio

South Carolina

West Virginia

Other states strictly enforce the legalities of Accord & Satisfaction and they are as follows:

Arkansas

Kansas

Louisiana

Maine

Nebraska

North Carolina

Pennsylvania

Utah

Virginia

Wyoming

Colorado

Connecticut

Georgia

Michigan

New Jersey

Oregon

Texas

Vermont

Washington

California is a whole different story when it comes to A&S. If the creditor, DC or CA you are wanting to execute a RE resides in California there are certain steps you must take before the A&S is legal.

First, you must notify the Creditor, CA or DC in writing that you are sending an instrument of A&S 15 days prior to you actually sending it. This 15 days gives the CA, DC or Creditor the option of refusing, objecting to or denying the A&S. If you have no response to the notice, you are free to send the A&S and even if they mark through it, they are still legally bound by it.

Your final alternative to these options is to simply start making payments on the debt that you cannot get settled. Start sending as much as you can each month, $25.00, $50.00 or whatever you can afford and keep sending those payments until you can afford to offer a lump sum payment on the account. Generally this will stop any Creditor from turning the account over to collections or pursuing a judgment against you.

This information comes from a site which is no longer around use to be called the faircreditmovement.

[betam4x]

Regardless of WHAT the terms of service state, RE law prevails above ToS. If you live in an RE state then they are bound by the terms of the RE. It's just like those cases where a creditor demands arbitration. If you sue the creditor and they use the arbitration clause as a defense it gets thrown out.

[lossuzy]

So I sent Time Warner a letter stating that they violated the RE agreement and nothing has happened yet.

I'm wondering though if they can get away with this because it is Credit Management (the CA) who is reporting and verifying the debt and not Time Warner Cable? I tried calling Time Warner today, but they left me on hold a long time, so I hung up. I'll try again tomorrow.

[Fizzle1979]

File a complaint with the BBB. Write a letter to the CEO of Time Warner and cc your local office.

[tonypilot7]

I found a very informative article on this technique here: http://www.carreonandassociates.com/articles/4settle.htm Hope it helps!

[flak88mm]

So do you have the research the RE laws in your state or the state the collector is in? I'm confused. Can someone clear up my confusion.

[lossuzy]

Thanks for the advice about contacting the BBB. I filed a complaint and the cable company called me today wanting to resolve the matter. We'll see how that goes.

[Methuss]

I would start with a letter to the cable company asking them to explain why they verified the tradeline in violation of the endorsement agreement and attach copies. Specify 30 days to reply. If they don't answer, sue them for liquidated damages and costs.

If they do answer and say they did not verify, then sue Experian for violation of the FCRA. Include a motion to show cause which requires them to send a representative to the court and explain why they responded with verification when the furnisher says they didn't verify it.

[lossuzy]

I sent them a letter saying that I recently pulled a copy of my credit report and found a charge from them on my report. I then said that I had Ex do an investigation and it came back verified which violates the RE agreement that we entered into last year. This was a couple of weeks ago and nobody responded to my letter.

The other day I filed a complaint with the BBB and a lady called me back from Time Warner and said she was handling the case. I told her about the letter that I sent above and she said that it could be sitting in a pile somewhere backlogged in collections. I emailed her a copy of the letter today, so I guess I'm just waiting for her to get back to me.

What do I do if she admits that they did verify the account? Can I still sue and what are liquidated damages? I included a clause in the RE that says if they do violate, then they have to give me a check for $132 which is what I paid them. Do you think that they will give me my money back? HA HA. I do want them to remove the collection off of my report.

[jasen]

I actually got a new CC in the mail last week and there is a clause in the terms of agreement that states if I send them any kind of payment with a RE on it, that they can cash it and it will NOT take away their rights to collect any remaining monies..etc.

I really have to wonder if that's even legal.

Since they can write whatever they want on the terms, and change the terms at any time, shouldn't it follow that we can send them a letter stating our own terms, and that by granting the credit line to us they are accepting those terms? That's exactly what they do to us.

/er, sorry, threadjack.

[isislc]

One quick thing, you said that you had to get EX to re-investigate. Well, unless you waited 120 days, most likely EX never contacted the CA and they just went with what was in the system already instead of actually contacting them. If you dispute an item a 2nd time in 120 days EX will tend to just Parrot what the last investigation produced. After the 120 days, they have to re-verify with the CA. It may not be the CA at all but the problem could lie with EX.

[lossuzy]

One quick thing, you said that you had to get EX to re-investigate. Well, unless you waited 120 days, most likely EX never contacted the CA and they just went with what was in the system already instead of actually contacting them. If you dispute an item a 2nd time in 120 days EX will tend to just Parrot what the last investigation produced. After the 120 days, they have to re-verify with the CA. It may not be the CA at all but the problem could lie with EX.

I did not know that about Experian. However, it has been way over 120 days since I asked them to investigate. I believe the first time that I asked them to investigate was in April of 2007. Then I had the RE deal with Comcast in May. They removed the collections from my TU and EQ, but not EX, so last month I asked EX to investigate and that is when it came back verified.

I also notice that on my report the TL was updated to say PAID. In my RE agreement they are not allowed to update any information.