Jump to content

ATT MOBILITY/EOS CCA on credit after 10 years


wkinney1
 Share

Recommended Posts

I noticed this on my credit bureau and yes, from 10 years ago i owe ATT mobility a debt that obviously was picked up by a Junk debt collector, EOC SSA is the company out of MASS. and they recieved a call from me and are telling me they dont have anything tying me to them by my social security number. They were VERY rude and said that they do not make errors but want me to prove to them its on my credit by faxing my credit history. After talking to them about this they still will not remove my collection account on my credit. they said if its on my credit i owe them, but they have no account number under my social, now get this i owe them 980!!!!!!!!! WOW how can i get this off? and do i have a lawsuit? man from Alabama.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now keep in mind I am no lawyer I am just giving you my opinion on this.

1) If it is infact debt is 10 years old you are out of statute of limitations. Further its against the law to put a debt up on someone credit report that is past 7 years on default. (If default the right word im a bit blond today.)

2) Never give collectors information, it is their job to prove it to you not the other way around.

Now how to proceed I am not 100% sure , Id email budd hibbs on this or wait for someone else with advice on it.

Just seeing you post been here for a way I figure I would give you that good news =).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I would do is dispute the debt with the company you called. I would do this in writing and as outlined in the FCRA. I would include a limited C&D with the language, all calls to you are invconvenent (yes use that word).

I would also dispute it directly with the credit reporting agency, in writing. Also everything needs to be sent certified mail return receipt requested (CMRRR).

I would not send them a copy of your credit report. It's their job to verify if you dispute properly.

This debt is past the reporting period for your credit report which is around 7 years. What they have done is called reaging. They have put this on your report with a fresh date so it will look more recent and cause you more harm. It's flat out illegal.

Alabama is a one party state, so I would record any calls to and from this company, but would keep my calls to them at a minimum or none for now.

Right now you need to lay a paper trail and do things by the book on your end. Once you have done this it will be time for them to act. They will have the choice and that can dictate your choice. Most likely they will do nothing.

It's not a long process, but not overnight by any stretch. Keep detailed records and logs. It would not hurt every so often to put your logs or converstations into an affidavit and have it notorized. This could come in handy down the road for a lawsuit.

Keep in mind with the FCRA you can stack violations. Unlike the FDCPA this can add up. It's frustrating right now, but your basically safe as the debt is past the statute of limitations for them legally being able to collect from you if they sue you. Yes it will require you asserting a statute of limitations defense, but that is way down the road and a minimal chance of happening.

So to recap, in my opinion, I would;

- Dispute in writing with the agency and the credit reporting agency(s).

- Start a detailed record and log system of all activity

- Send as part of the dispute letter a limited C&D restricting phone calls

- Invest in a phone recorder

- Save all documents or correspondances no matter how trivial they seem

- Make sure everything is an alleged account and an alleged debt when communicating with this company or others for that matter

- research the FCRA, FDCPA & any consumer protection state laws that Alabama might have.

- Finally, keep your cool and don't lose your focus. You never know. It might be a brother with the same name and different middle initial or something that has run up this bill and they just have the wrong person their going after. :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not a lawyer, but I am a law student.

I have said time and time again, there is no such thing as limited cease and desist.Its all or nothing.

Use the 623 method its at the top of all the pages in this forum. They may think they have a claim but a 10 year old debt is past the SOL to collect.

Do the dates on your credit report reflect that the debt is ten years old. If so the credit reporting agencies should remove it if you inform them of the situation.

If the ca has changed any dates to reflect that the debt is newer than ten years old they have reaged the account and thats a big no no.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not a lawyer, but I am a law student.

I have said time and time again, there is no such thing as limited cease and desist.Its all or nothing.

Use the 623 method its at the top of all the pages in this forum. They may think they have a claim but a 10 year old debt is past the SOL to collect.

Do the dates on your credit report reflect that the debt is ten years old. If so the credit reporting agencies should remove it if you inform them of the situation.

If the ca has changed any dates to reflect that the debt is newer than ten years old they have reaged the account and thats a big no no.

If you send them a letter stating that phone calls are inconvienient, they have to stop calling you under the FDCPA. I can also C&D a CA, then later ask them a specific question and tell them that they can contact me specifically regarding that, and they are allowed to respond. It's not all or nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I would do is dispute the debt with the company you called. I would do this in writing and as outlined in the FCRA. I would include a limited C&D with the language, all calls to you are invconvenent (yes use that word).

I would also dispute it directly with the credit reporting agency, in writing. Also everything needs to be sent certified mail return receipt requested (CMRRR).

I would not send them a copy of your credit report. It's their job to verify if you dispute properly.

This debt is past the reporting period for your credit report which is around 7 years. What they have done is called reaging. They have put this on your report with a fresh date so it will look more recent and cause you more harm. It's flat out illegal.

Alabama is a one party state, so I would record any calls to and from this company, but would keep my calls to them at a minimum or none for now.

Right now you need to lay a paper trail and do things by the book on your end. Once you have done this it will be time for them to act. They will have the choice and that can dictate your choice. Most likely they will do nothing.

It's not a long process, but not overnight by any stretch. Keep detailed records and logs. It would not hurt every so often to put your logs or converstations into an affidavit and have it notorized. This could come in handy down the road for a lawsuit.

Keep in mind with the FCRA you can stack violations. Unlike the FDCPA this can add up. It's frustrating right now, but your basically safe as the debt is past the statute of limitations for them legally being able to collect from you if they sue you. Yes it will require you asserting a statute of limitations defense, but that is way down the road and a minimal chance of happening.

So to recap, in my opinion, I would;

- Dispute in writing with the agency and the credit reporting agency(s).

- Start a detailed record and log system of all activity

- Send as part of the dispute letter a limited C&D restricting phone calls

- Invest in a phone recorder

- Save all documents or correspondances no matter how trivial they seem

- Make sure everything is an alleged account and an alleged debt when communicating with this company or others for that matter

- research the FCRA, FDCPA & any consumer protection state laws that Alabama might have.

- Finally, keep your cool and don't lose your focus. You never know. It might be a brother with the same name and different middle initial or something that has run up this bill and they just have the wrong person their going after. :wink:

I am asking you this, if i need a paper trail but havent recieved any bills from the collection agency in a while! what do you reccomend as far as any kind of paper trail, and also i found out there is two other active accounts that arent even tied to my social security number, i mean how the hell is it an active collection account??? yes the debt is showing a new active date of 3-10 it's just like another gentleman told me its reaging the debt which in return is lowering my score, and what kind of outcome should i expect if these get removed? like 5 points per debt?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not a lawyer, but I am a law student.

I have said time and time again, there is no such thing as limited cease and desist.Its all or nothing.

Law school student or not, attorney or not, trust me you can limited cease all day long. There is no "legal" term you will find that says limited C&D, I'll give you that.

However, it's simply written into the law. You can tell them to only contact you by mail and all calls are inconvenent. That is a limited cease. You have, per the EXACT language in the FDCPA told them not to CALL you. Then you have turned around and told them contact with you by MAIL is fine. That's a limited C&D all day long without calling it a limited C&D.

If you say no to all contact then say but write me, that's not going to fly. If you spell it out and use the exact language in the statute you can accomplish what you want without ever calling it a limited C&D.

It's like a collection agency saying we don't do pay for deletes. Fine don't do a pay for delete. Do a pay for confidentiality agreement. You have accomplished 100% the same thing without calling it a pay for delete. You have taken away their right to legally verify the account if you dispute and therefore it must be deleted. It's a pay for delete all day long just called something else. You can limited C&D all day long and just call it something else.

Bottom line call it flying to the moon in a rocket ship or any other name you want to give it. You can limited C&D and just because you say it time and time again does not make your position right. You are simply wrong, time and time again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am asking you this, if i need a paper trail but havent recieved any bills from the collection agency in a while! what do you reccomend as far as any kind of paper trail, and also i found out there is two other active accounts that arent even tied to my social security number, i mean how the hell is it an active collection account??? yes the debt is showing a new active date of 3-10 it's just like another gentleman told me its reaging the debt which in return is lowering my score, and what kind of outcome should i expect if these get removed? like 5 points per debt?

Who knows the outcome on your score. It all depends on other factors on your report. Generally speaking, a brand new mark on your report has a huge impact. It's not a formula like 5 points per debt. If you can find or figure out the exact formula you need to share it with us all. I'm not sure the CRA even know.

The paper trail is your paper trail that you will start. Like the other poster was talking about with the 623 method. You start your paper trail. Trust me, you'll need it if you push this to court.

How the hell an active account on your report? Simple my friend, it's illegal and their trying to put you in a position to pay it to make it go away. Are you going to pay something, your or not from 10 years ago they can't legally put on your report or legally sue you for. In other words something that has zero impact on you at all? Of course not, and they know that. They know they have no leverage if they comply with the law and they want leverage. That leaves them only two options. Beg you to pay them just to be a nice guy and pay or put it on your report illegally and try to extort the money out of you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That leaves them only two options. Beg you to pay them just to be a nice guy and pay or put it on your report illegally and try to extort the money out of you.

Why yes, yes, I think that would count as extortion. All you need is one more out of 34 illegal acts and it becomes a RICO case. Wouldn't it be funny if EOC SSA needed to be, but wasn't licensed in the OP's state?

Edited by usagi555
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a similar situation with Att, they refused to remove an old account off my CR, so I filed suit immediately, they where a pain in the butt for many months and the case went to court and it was later dismissed, so build your paper trail, so just in case you have to file suit for FCRA violations. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it is 10 years old then the only way it is on your CRA is they re-aged it, which is a FCRA and a FDCPA violation.

They were VERY rude and said that they do not make errors but want me to prove to them its on my credit by faxing my credit history. After talking to them about this they still will not remove my collection account on my credit. they said if its on my credit i owe them, but they have no account number under my social, now get this i owe them 980!!!!!!!!!

Stop talking and start suing. They claim you owe $980? You sue them for $2,000 ($1,000 FCRA and $1,000 FDCPA)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it is 10 years old then the only way it is on your CRA is they re-aged it, which is a FCRA and a FDCPA violation.

Stop talking and start suing. They claim you owe $980? You sue them for $2,000 ($1,000 FCRA and $1,000 FDCPA)

That's true and all for it, but he does need to get his paper trail started. I would not make the first move a lawsuit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IM TOTALLY NEW WHAT IS 623? AND THERE ARE THREE OTHER REAGED DEBTS THREE OUT OF THE FOUR DEBTS SAY THEY CANT FIND ME IN THEIR SYSTEM SAYING MY SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER DOESN T SHOW IN THEIR SYSTEM AND ALL THREE DIFFERENT AGENCIES ASKED ME TO FAX COPIES TO THEM SHOWING ITS ON MY CREDIT??? I AM TOTALLY NEW TO THIS AND THESE ARE SERIOUS ANOUNTS SOME UP TO 2000. ONE IS A VERY OLD CHECKING ACCOUNT THAT WAS PICKED UP BY ANOTHER RECOVERY AGENCY SAYING I OWE THEM 2045 FOR AN ACCOUNT THAT WAS CLOSED IN 2000 AND WAS 121.12 TOTAL OWED? GUYS AND GALS IM TOTALLY NEW TO THIS FORUM AND AM NOT COMPREHENDING YOUR ABBREVIATIONS, ALSO WHAT IS THE BEST WAY TO GET THIS OFF MY CREDIT CAUSE THESE FOUR ARE SHOWING AS NEW DEBT THAT I OWE AND LIKE I KEEP REITTERATING THREE OF THE FOUR ARE SAYING THEY DONT EVEN SHOW MY SOCIAL IN THEIR SYSTEM AND ONLY MY NAME? LIKE I SAID THE CHECKING ACCOUNT WAS CLOSED IN 2000 BUT NOW REFLECTS THE DATE OF 6-11??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Understand your frustration and your disbelief these debts could be so old yet show so current on your report. It's just common sense it would not be this way. Your looking at it from a common sense angle.

However, it's not that uncommon. A 623 is a way to dispute while setting up a lawsuit at the same time. There is link at the top of the page.

You have to really read and learn the FCRA and FDCPA. The JDB relies on your ignorance of the laws and the assumption you will do nothing, but if get deseprate enough will just pay it to make it go away.

Your being told the best way to get it off your report. You have to do a lot of work is the sad bottom line. You have to dispute and stay off the phone unless your recorder is running. Then if your new to the game probably best to stay off the phone with them anyway.

Your going to have to be proactive and aggressive. Threats won't cut it. Those will be ignored. You probably can't or don't want to spend thousands on an attorney. The attorney general and/or FTC sometimes get involved but it is after tons of complaints and it is class action. That just leaves you. Your not going to get this off with a phone call or letter telling them you will sue.

The bottom line, to answer your question, sometimes the only way to get it off your report is to sue. These are so old there can simply be no question or legit excuse. You can only do so much before you must take the advice of Flying in the above post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I am trying to explain is why are we calling it a limited C&D. Its a C&D. The letter you send them specifically states what to C&D.

The C&D in its self puts limits on the other person.

The way I suggest to people to do this is to first invoke the C&D in its entirety, then state that written communication is permitted. Actually, I'd go a little narrower and allow only written communication that is sent by registered mail requiring a recipient signature (that is returned to the sender) for delivery, AND under the condition that both parties agree to accept all tendered deliveries.

Is there any (case or statutory) law you know of that disallows agreeing parties to carve out exceptions to laws that give a party an option to invoke rights to prohibit? I know of none in the FDCPA itself. Are there any universally broad laws against this practice?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way I suggest to people to do this is to first invoke the C&D in its entirety, then state that written communication is permitted. Actually, I'd go a little narrower and allow only written communication that is sent by registered mail requiring a recipient signature (that is returned to the sender) for delivery, AND under the condition that both parties agree to accept all tendered deliveries.

I hate taking the side of a collector (makes me puke), but you can't blame them when they ignore this and either totally C&D or just sue.

That is so complicated (legally) that you can't expect them to agree to this. It has the smell of a lawsuit set up written all over it. Your sending letters that contridict each other and then making mail only certified and finally putting restrictions on certified mail. Personally, I think that is wreckless advice to anybody that is not willing and able to defend against a lawsuit.

I'd take just about any argument to court, but I would never try to paint the collector as not willing to communicate with me if I had made this many hoops to jump through just to communicate with me. In their defense (:-(), we all know their not going to be sending us certified mail unless it is a settlement or a lawsuit.

It is so easy to accomplish this and fully assert and protect your rights. It's written into the FDCPA. All call are inconvienet gets the job done. Throw any communication by mail is acceptable, and in two sentences you have covered every single scenerio there is. If they argue a certain type of call you did not restrict ask them what part of all they don't understand for telephone contact and what part of any do they not understand for mail contact.

Two sentences and you have it covered. You don't need case law (even though you have with the FDCPA) and it does not appear your setting them up for a lawsuit. There are tons of things to complicate on purpose when dealing with the scumbag collectors, but why complicate something so easy and that works totally on behalf of the consumer? I live for the day to argue against a collector in court, but even with strict liability, I would cringe during the evidence stage if I was suing for violating the FDCPA for not honoring my complex C&D. Your assumed the least sophisicated (for FDCPA purposes), use it to your advantage.

Edited by Coltfan1972
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still have concerns about 1692C(a)(1) which I believe you are referring to. Two parts give rise to this concern. The words "In the absence of knowledge of circumstances to the contrary" suggests that the collector must have knowledge about circumstances, rather than just the expressed assert of inconvenience (e.g. why is it inconvenient).

The other part of the concern is that the assertion of "inconvenience" puts the consumer in a potential situation of fraud by making the assertion when it (for some cases) could be untrue. It's like saying "I don't have the money to pay this debt" when in fact they do have the money.

But there is the clause in 1692C(a) saying "Without the prior consent of the consumer given directly to the debt collector". What I suggested would be such a consent, conditioned as it may be. Of course, no consumer can compel a collector or accept such an offer just because it is offered. The collector can, and the wary collector perhaps should, just fall back on the initial C&D and treat it as unconditional. That's their safe harbor.

Thinking more about this, though, I suppose the "inconvenience" assertion can be constructed as "since I am unable to make a legal record of the communication by telephone, that is inconvenient to communication about a legal matter that way". I believe we can convince everyone that it is truthfully inconvenient.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason you state inconvenient is because you want to use the exact statuatory language. It leaves no wiggle room. The statute does not say you must disclose why it is inconvenient.

Proving something is not inconvenient is like trying to prove my back does not hurt when I say it hurts, I don't have a headache if I say I do, and I'm not in a bad mood when I say I am. It's impossible to prove. If I say my back is broken, you can easily prove it's not by asking the doctor that saw you. However, no matter what kind of perfect health I am in, If I say my back hurts you can't prove it does not hurt.

It's not needed, but all one would have to say is talking to a bill collector gives me anxiety. Once again, prove I don't have anxeity when I say I do. Same goes for disputing. If I say I dispute I owe this debt, I don't recall the debt. How can one prove I do recall the debt.

Another example, when I was answering interrogatories. I argued I did not have a ton of documents they requested. My argument, I'm a horrible record keeper, I can't even balance a checkbook, I'm the living example of how not to keep records and other important documents. Of course they could not prove I was a horrible record keeper. They did not even try a motion to compel.

In your example of I don't have the money to pay the debt. That is easy also. I can have a million dollars but I have not allocated any of that money to pay the debt. So while I do have the money, it's not pay this debt with.

It is really way over thinking this. The FDCPA says if you tell them it's inconvenient to contact you, they can't legally contact you except one more time to tell you what their next action will be.

Also I think your misinterperting the statute.

§ 805. Communication in connection with debt collection [15 USC 1692c]

(a) COMMUNICATION WITH THE CONSUMER GENERALLY. Without the prior consent of the consumer given directly to the debt collector or the express permission of a court of competent jurisdiction, a debt collector may not communicate with a consumer in connection with the collection of any debt --

(1) at any unusual time or place or a time or place known or which should be known to be inconvenient to the consumer. In the absence of knowledge of circumstances to the contrary, a debt collector shall assume that the convenient time for communicating with a consumer is after 8 o'clock antimeridian and before 9 o'clock postmeridian, local time at the consumer's location;

Once you tell the collector anytime is inconvenient they now have the time it's inconvenient, it happens to be all the time. It says right there, or a time known. The key word or. You have taken their right to assume what is inconvenient and replaced it with the known time of what is inconvenient, once again, all the time.

The knowledge of the cimustances to the contrary is your notification all the time is inconvenient. It is now contrary to the collectors knowledge, which is given the collector, in the statute, on what they can assume is inconvenient.

In other words you just took that legal assumption they can make and replaced it by giving them knowledge it's inconvenient all the time, not just what is spelled out in the statute on what is and is not convenient, they now have knowledge it all the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.