Can I make a contract have penalties if they do not remove the Bad Reports

Recommended Posts

Can I add penalties to a Debt settlement letter that will make sure they remove bad reports from all 3 TransUnion -Experian - Equifax

Example: if they fail to remove bad reports in 15days they have to pay me of each every day they fail after 15 days. They`ve have to pay penaltie to me of $300-1000 of each day that matchs the debt their trying to collect

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, and you should. It's called a liquidated damages clause. You'll have to get a lot more reasonable than what you are proposing, but the point is yes you can and you should put in a liquidated damages clause.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't have a link but I'm sure if you google it you can find a lot.

However, in my opinion, something as simple as laying out the terms and then at the end.

Either party which fails to perform under this contact/agreement and/or breeches this contract and/or agreement (really the same thing basically) shall owe the other party which did not breech this contract/agreement $5,000.00 as liquidated damages.

Keep in mind if you are wanting them to remove this from your credit report you will need to word the agreement where they are telling the CRA to remove whatever. You can't hold them responsible if they do everything in their power to have this removed and then the CRA does not or drags their feet on this.

Make sure anything in the agreement you are demanding either party has the ability to do what you want. It's okay to rely on a third party, like a CRA, but you can't hold another person responsible for something they don't have direct control over.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Liquidated damages are nice.

If there is any confidentiality or secrecy clause *I* would want to be paid or credited for such as it is a material benefit to the other party. A NDA solely covering only the amount agreed on probably would just be a bargaining chip and not a huge issue for me.

There are two issues to address as I see it. We have the initial removals and ongoing risk of improper derogs being added back through the CRA.

Some like to control the timing of removals by having the adversary, by the agreement, never respond to CRA inquiries. The theory these proponents espouse is that this allows them to dispute with the CRA at a time of their choosing and the agreement-required non-response by the furnisher should make the derog be removed due to inability to verify. This approach would be done in cases where there are future potential settlements to be done and it is preferable that those creditors don't see you as an easy mark with improving credit putting you in a tougher bargaining position. I have not done this as my idea of settlement starts at Dis. w/ Prej. and I am not trying to fix my credit score but it would merit a look (and hopefully a review of some responses by those that have actually used the method) if I was in such a situation.

I also like the idea of when the other party or their agent, successor, etc. causes or permits an improper post of a derog on my credit (or fails to remove initially within 30 days) that any and all secrecy/confidentiality/NDA is forever released (perhaps a typical severability clause keeping the rest of the agreement binding). In negotiations I would view any objection to such terms as a tacit admission that they are planning to ding (or fail to remove derogs) my credit files on purpose or "accident" and they cannot stop themselves.

My attitude is that if you, as a company, are going to fail to honor your commitments the world should hear about it. That's what creditors and JDBs routinely allege through court and CAs so they should be real familiar with the concept. :razz:

Contracts are real live creatures that can cause you harm if you don't know what you are doing. If you sign a contract someone else drafted guess who has the advantage. Having a competent attorney, familiar with contracts of this nature, review the terms might be well worth the expenditure.

An voluntary agreement is limited only by the imagination and the will of the parties.

Edited by Credator
Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.