queenofwands

JDB reporting wrong DOFD - best dispute method

Recommended Posts

Hello all,

 

I have one final large derogatory collection account left on my report.  US Bank charged it off "as of May 2004 to Feb 2006", so the DOFD is 2/2006 or earlier right? I have a letter from the first CA (CaCi) trying to collect on this US Bank tradeline dated 5/3/2006.  It was sold on 4/5/2007 to NCS Corp, and then sold again to TCM Financial Services in 7/2008.  TCM has been a real pain in my butt.  When I started disputing with CRAs a year ago, they came up out of the woodwork and tried collecting again on this debt that is out of SOL, after laying dormant for years.  Anyhow, I need to get them off and gone once and for all.

 

I have a 2006 Experian Credit Report that shows the US Bank Charge Off Date, the dunning letters from CaCi, NCS Corp, and TCM Financial with all of the dates referenced above.  What is my best approach to disputing this?  My understanding is that the negative item can legally only be reported until 7 years & 6 months past the DOFD.  In my case, the DOFD being 2/06 or earlier, it should be taken off August 2013 at the latest!  But TCM is also reporting inaccurate information, which could also get it removed - although they are feisty and keep readding it.

 

My guess is, best to show all proof of DOFD and CA>JDB trail, dispute the DOFD as reported by TCM, quote whatever FCRA law that says it should come off by now, and request it be removed? 

 

Thanks in advance for any advice you can give!

 

Holly

Link to post
Share on other sites

@queenofwands

 

I would dispute the DOFD with the credit reporting agencies.  I don't know that it's necessary to provide proof right now.  The JDB is supposed to report accurately.  If the JDB verifies the date, you can either send a letter to the JDB disputing the entry and the DOFD, or go ahead and get an attorney.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@queenofwands

 

I would dispute the DOFD with the credit reporting agencies.  I don't know that it's necessary to provide proof right now.  The JDB is supposed to report accurately.  If the JDB verifies the date, you can either send a letter to the JDB disputing the entry and the DOFD, or go ahead and get an attorney.

 

Thanks for the reply @BV80.  Since the point is that it can't legally be included on my report any longer, it would be faster to just have the CRA remove it on that merit alone right?  The JDB has proven that they want to make my life as complicated as possible.  So I don't mind providing the proof to the CRA, since my claim is indisputable and if it will get it handled quicker.  I have the paper trail of everything I quoted in my letter, and made copies to attach to the letter (and color-coded everything, ha).  I'm trying to figure out how to attach the letter to this post..?

Link to post
Share on other sites

@queenofwands

 

You're right that including proof in your dispute would probably net faster results.  I didn't know if you wanted to see if the JDB would verify so that you could sue them.

 

@BV80

 

Ohh, I see what you mean. I think I just want to get this crap off my report and be a fully-functioning human being again! What could I potentially stand to gain by suing the JDB?  When I disputed the account as not being mine a year ago, they verified and bumped the amount down about $5k.  They also hit me with an inquiry (a hard pull!), LONG after the SOL expired... (my understanding is, no permissible purpose?), and started harassing me with phone calls again until I blocked their numerous phone numbers from calling me.

 

The reason I wanted to get this resolved ASAP was that I was declined for a Citibank card, and they said this account was the reason.  They said if I send them my credit report with the corrected info within 45 days, they will reevaluate my application.  It's all just part of my credit-rebuilding process...I want to get and keep that card.

 

Do you see anything wrong with what I put in the letter?

 

1375775_457129501069060_1412509317_n.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

TCM's opening date of 7/01/2008 is, more than likely, the date the claim to have purchased the account and opened it in their files.  They're not claiming that you opened the account on that date.

 

Regarding TCM's inquiry, debt collection is a permissible purpose to pull your CR.  However, since they are outside the SOL for reporting, I'm not sure they should have made a hard inquiry.  A "soft" inquiry that's not seen by others might be ok.   But, since they probably can't prove they own your account, I would have an issue with either kind of inquiry.

 

You requested that the above information be verified and deleted.  If the JDB's information is verified, it's not deleted.  I would point out that based upon the information and documentation that you've provided, you request that TCM's entry be deleted.

 

Also, NCAC is probably going to contact TCM and request verification.  Hopefully, the docs you've provided will speed things along.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@queenofwands

 

It's possible you could go after them for FDCPA violations of 1692e(2) & (10).  But that could depend upon whether or not your federal district court and circuit court of appeals considers credit reporting to be an attempt to collect a debt.  If they do, you might have a claim.

 

The only way you could get an FCRA violation is by disputing with the CRAs and the JDB verifying the false information.  If the CRA merely removes it, you may not have a claim.  However, if the CRA does contact the JDB, the JDB verifies, and the CRA doesn't remove it, you could have an FCRA claim under 1681s-2(b).

Link to post
Share on other sites

@BV80 (or anyone who has something to add):

 

So Experian said they couldn't delete it based on the info I sent them, and that they were going to request verification from TCM.  TCM is now blowing up my phone daily I suppose trying to verify, asking for a callback.  The first time I disputed and Experian requested verification from TCM a year ago (different dispute), they started trying to collect from me again. 

 

The key points on this situation are that the TL is well out of SOL.  They shouldn't even be reporting it.  They of course only want to deal with me by phone.

 

I really just want them to delete the TL, but am not opposed to suing them if I have to or their stupidity warrants it.  But I am worried about speaking with them via phone, and that I will say the wrong thing.  What is the best way for me to handle this?  Do I need to be prepared to quote statutes from FCRA etc?  Should I tell them I'll sue them if they don't fix it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

@queenofwands

 

Let Experian request verification from TCM.  Hopefully, this will resolve the issue.  If the entry is verified, you can send a strongly worded letter to TCM.   If they don't cooperate, well, you could have a claim against them.  In fact, you might also have one against Experian.  A good consumer attorney would know if that's the case.

 

Is TCM leaving messages?  If so, are they on your landline or cell phone?  Are they prerecorded messages or live calls?  What is said in the messages?

Link to post
Share on other sites

@BV80

 

TCM is leaving messages on my cell phone... 

 

In the first message he said:

"My name is xxx here, I do need to get a return call back, very important that you return my call. My number is 877-xxx-xxxx. Thank you." 

That was yesterday.

 

This morning when he called he said:

"My name is xxx, I'm calling you in reference to a consumer dispute that you had filed, I'd like to discuss that with you, give me a return call back. 877-xxx-xxxx. Thank you."

Link to post
Share on other sites

Look at the article in yestersay's Wall Street Journal about large class action awards for the behavior you cite.  A consumer attorney may very well take your case on a contngency basis.

 

Did you ever send a C&D letter to TCM? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@queenofwands

 

I agree that you should speak to a consumer attorney.  In those messages, they didn't disclose that they are attempting to collect a debt. (1692e(11) of the FDCPA)

 

Now, they would argue that they were not attempting to collect a debt but were responding to your credit report dispute.  That could be a chink in an FDCPA claim, so that's why you need to speak to an attorney.

 

If you choose not to involve an attorney, if it were me, I wouldn't answer their calls.  They don't have to call but can send a letter instead.

 

I'd wait to see the results of the dispute before making my next move.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you ever send a C&D letter to TCM? 

 

@VADebtor

 

Thanks for the reply.  A year ago I disputed for something else, they responded the same way, and I sent them a letter, not exactly C&D, that they were only to contact me by mail.  They verified with CRA, then continued collection calls multiple times daily via a dialer until I managed to block all of their many numbers from calling me thru AT&T's Smart Limits (which you have to pay for, btw!).  I took it off about 3-4 months ago, and haven't received a call until the last couple days.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@queenofwands

 

There's no court precedent regarding a "limited C&D". 

 

In addition, in your case, the JDB is responding to a credit report dispute.  Again, they would argue that they were not attempting to collect a debt. 

 

Regarding "a dialer", did they leave messages?  Were they live or prerecorded?  Did you save them?  :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

@BV80

 

The burden is on them to verify to the CRA that they are reporting accurate information which has been disputed by me, right?  I assume I am not obligated in any way to discuss the matter with them, as I've clearly already disputed the accuracy of the information they are reporting...

 

In your opinion, would it benefit me in any way, to call him back and tell him they are in error, reporting on a time-barred debt that is long past the reporting period (being 5/2004 - 11/2011)?  Not that I want to give them the benefit of the doubt, but since the TL has been sold so many times, it's certainly likely they don't have the OC info right?  I could obviously also do this in writing.  What frustrates me is that it shouldn't be my responsibility to tell them the history of the TL they purchased and are reporting on, when disputing it with the CRA is already expressing this... 

 

How to go about finding a Consumer Attorney in Los Angeles?  Any chance anyone on here knows or has experience with some already?

Link to post
Share on other sites

@queenofwands

 

In theory, the burden is on them.  However, I'm not sure that it's known exactly what is required by the CRAs to satisfy that burden.  I suspect that it doesn't take much. 

 

That being said, if you file a lawsuit, the burden of proof is on you to prove your claim.   Some plaintiffs include the CRA in an FCRA lawsuit in which they claim inaccurate information by the furnisher.  They will claim that the CRA did not conduct a reasonable investigation.  If you were to do so, you'd have to first find out what your court considers to be a "reasonable investigation".

 

When you disputed with Experian, was your dispute precise as to the inaccurate information you believe is being reported?

Link to post
Share on other sites

@BV80

 

I do have all the voicemails they left.  They are prerecorded, with a robot that says my name.

 

VOICEMAILS

10/22/12 - (unknown #) Rep, "responding to dispute"

10/23/12 - (unknown #) Rep, "calling in regards to a matter in his office"

10/23/12 - (877 #) Prerecording, "this is an important msg for xxx, this is not a sales or marketing call, to retrieve this important msg press the 1 key now, or call us back at x"

10/23/12 - SENT LETTER TO STOP CALLING

10/24/12 - (unknown #) Rep, "need you to give me a return call" 

10/25/12 - (unknown #) Rep, "need you to give me a return call" 

10/25/12 - (877 #) Prerecording

10/26/12 - (323 #)TCM Rep, different # "I need you to give me a return call"

10/26/12 - BLOCKED (323#) FROM CALLING ME

11/09/12 - (888 #) Prerecording

11/09/12 - BLOCKED (888#) FROM CALLING ME

11/11/12 - (877 #) Prerecording

11/11/12 - BLOCKED (877#) FROM CALLING ME

11/12/12 - (323 #) Prerecording

11/12/12 - BLOCKED (323#) FROM CALLING ME

11/20/12 - (323 #) Prerecording

11/20/12 - BLOCKED (323#) FROM CALLING ME

12/14/12 - (562 #) Prerecording

01/03/13 - (562 #) Prerecording

01/18/13 - (562 #) Prerecording

01/18/13 - BLOCKED (562#) FROM CALLING ME

 

At some point last November, after they verified with the CRA, they sent me a letter demanding payment in full. I think I also have a few screenshots from my phone of all the missed calls where there were no messages left too...

Link to post
Share on other sites

That being said, if you file a lawsuit, the burden of proof is on you to prove your claim.   Some plaintiffs include the CRA in an FCRA lawsuit in which they claim inaccurate information by the furnisher.  They will claim that the CRA did not conduct a reasonable investigation.  If you were to do so, you'd have to first find out what your court considers to be a "reasonable investigation".

 

When you disputed with Experian, was your dispute precise as to the inaccurate information you believe is being reported?

 

@BV80

 

Yes, I was very precise, and even included an old Experian report with the OC reporting the delinquency period 5/04-2/06 (since the OC has now fallen off the report, and rightfully so!), as well as documentation from each CA & JDB to show the change in ownership but that it is the same TL.  They didn't accept it as sufficient.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@queenofwands

 

Okey dokey.  A prerecorded message indicates an autodialer was used.  While we know CAs and JDBs use autodialers all the time, it's easier to prove when they leave a prerecorded message.

 

My next question is:  Did you provide your cell number to the original creditor (OC) when you applied for the account?   If you gave it to the OC, a CA or JDB then has permission to call your cell via an autodialer.

 

The Telephone Consumer Protection Act provides that in order for certain callers to contact you on your cell phone using an autodialer, they must have express permission from you to do so.  Express permission would include your cell number on an application, in a letter you wrote to them saying "contact me at this number", etc.

 

It would not include the creditor "capturing" your number as a result of a call you made to them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@BV80

 

No, the account was opened in 2001 or so when I lived in AZ, I had a different area code.  I moved to CA in 2003 and changed my cell phone # after that...

 

In fact, I'm pretty sure TCM got my # as a result of the first Experian dispute.  Prior to that I never received any calls from them or any of the prior CAs to my knowledge. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@queenofwands

 

I would contact a consumer attorney.  As long as you're sure that you never provided your cell number to the OC or TCM, you could possibly have TCPA violations.  If TCM verifies your dispute, you might be able to add an FCRA and FDCPA violation.

 

It's up to TCM to prove they had your express consent to call your cell using an autodialer.

 

I'm sure Calawyer (a member on this site) could recommend a good consumer attorney who might take your case on contingency.  Or you could contact NACA.

 

http://www.naca.net

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.