Jump to content

Advice on Unpaid Collection


DARTH_VADER
 Share

Recommended Posts

I have an unpaid auto repossession that has does not have a judgment.  Loan first delinquent on 9/1/2008 and sold/opened to collection agency 1/1/2010 and last updated 2/1/2010.  I am applying for an FHA loan and multiple lenders have told me that this is my only roadblock in getting approved.  But I am torn on how I should handle this debt as the amount with interest is at 48k.  Should I use a chunk of my down payment to settle this?  Should I just file for bankruptcy?  Will this drop off based on the fair credit reporting act?  These are all suggestions by different loan officers.  It has already been affecting me for the past 6 years and I have since recovered my credit score from a hole since then.  But is it worth it to chuck money at it this late?

Any advice would be appreciated.  Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@DARTH_VADER

 

I can't imagine that a bk would help you to get a loan.  You also have to consider the fact that only a certain amount of cash is protected in bk.  You need to know the bk exemptions in your state.

 

I don't believe that a repo remains on your CR for more than 7 years, but a consumer attorney (or perhaps someone here) could answer that.  Here's the section of the FCRA to which this pertains:  It's 1681c(a).

 

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/1681c

 

What's the SOL for collection on that type of debt?  A car loan is usually a secured loan.   You need to find out if NV's SOL for secured debt is the same as that for unsecured debt.  If it's still within the SOL, and if you were sued for that debt, could you afford to pay it if you have a mortgage?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thank you @BV80 for your response.

 

From my own research. The SOL in NV is 6 years, been living in NV since 2012.  I was living in CA at the time of the repo and the SOL in CA is 4 years.  I don't know which one I would fall under.  I have not been sued for this debt and just appears as 'COLLECTIONS' on my CR.  From my understanding, I may be wrong, this is outside the SOL in either state now as its past 6 years (Sept. 1 2008).  I am hoping someone on here knows if this will drop from my CR.  Will the original debt on my CR be removed and the Collections Agency who bought the dept remain regardless of the 7 years?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off, the SOL is 4 years. Go to top of page and click on the "Statute of Limitations". Scroll to Nevada and read the whole statute.

When did you move to Nevada? Exact date.

We'll start here with California. You were in California when the vehicle was repo'd. Therefore, California's statutes on repo's takes precedence. If you did not receive a letter from them within 10 days that gives you their intent, etc., they cannot legally collect the unpaid balance. You'll find this at California Civil Code 1812.2-1812.5. Read it all. Some may argue this is not true. I used this three years ago for a friend. The CA apologized, closed, and deleted.

The reporting period is 7 years from date of first delinquency. I'm assuming by your 9/1/2008 comment that this is when you first missed a payment. If true, then it will delete by that date in 2015, or during August. This does happen on occasion. And, yes, both will delete.

Myself, if you did not receive the letter, I would send a C&D to this collector, advising them they are in violation of California Civil Code 1788.1 et seq, and CCC, 1812.2-1812.5, in that they are misrepresenting the legal status of the debt as well as attempting to collect a debt not owed. You will also include that it is illegal and a violation in California to "EVEN" attempt to collect a claim too old to be enforced. And, yes, in California, it is. You'll find this at CCC 1788.1, et seq.

I say this as even though you have moved to Nevada, there is no reason to believe that the statute has been tolled. I asked for the exact date to know that you moved after the statute has run. If not, don't say anything about it to them.

Regarding your mortgage app, it is true they will not OK the loan until it shows a zero balance, or deleted. As BV80 mentioned, you may want to consult a Consumer Attorney, but, it is entirely up to you. Do not waste your time filing a complaint with the Consumer Department (forget their actual name) in Carson City. They are a joke. I know

first hand. My wife and I lived in Vegas in late 70's to mid 80's, plus many years in Reno. I was there the morning of the fire at the old MGM. Not wanting to be a security guard I left and went across the street to the Maxim, now called the "Western ?????". Our youngest daughter lives in the SW area.

To include, if this collector has not bothered you for some time, you could also send a dispute to the CRA's, using the claim that is isn't yours. This is most often the first dispute claim. On some occasions, the TL will be deleted. If they are in touch, just send the C&D. Be sure and include that no phone calls will be accepted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

If this were me, I would dispute this with the CRAs first.  If any of them come back "verified" or "updated" and they remain on your report, then I would follow up with a certified letter to the CRA requesting the method of verification along with the name and address of the person who verified the TL to them. 

 

If it still remains after that, then look at the TL very closely.  If there are any accuracies you can file suit for FCRA violations and agree to settle with them for removal of the TL.

 

If all else fails, as already mentioned, this will drop off your reports anyway in less than a year.  It can not continue to be reported after 7 years from default.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@retmar
 

 

You will also include that it is illegal and a violation in California to "EVEN" attempt to collect a claim too old to be enforced. And, yes, in California, it is. You'll find this at CCC 1788.1, et seq.

 

 

According to CA law, a debt buyer can attempt to collect a time-barred debt as long as they include a disclaimer about the age of the account and that the consumer will not be sued.

 

1788.52(d)(2)

(2) When collecting on a time-barred debt where the debt is not
past the date for obsolescence provided for in Section 605(a) of the
federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. Sec. 1681c):

   "The law limits how long you can be sued on a debt. Because of the
age of your debt, we will not sue you for it. If you do not pay the
debt, [insert name of debt buyer] may [continue to] report it to the
credit reporting agencies as unpaid for as long as the law permits
this reporting."

 

Note that the above-referenced disclaimer went into effect on debts that were sold or resold on or after Jan. 1, 2014.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BV80, that is a new one.  I guess I best reprint my statutes.  Give me some time as I'm going to contact the Department of Consumer Affairs, to see if they updated the Summary of the Rosenthal.  Plus, see what I can find.  They do have the Summary online.  I'll check there first.  If you try, go to the website and search for the summary.  It's been some time since I went there as I printed it out several years ago.  In fact, this is where I got the sentence I quote.  You'll find it in the footnotes at end of summary.

 

Myself, I read this as referring to the FCRA, not the FDCPA.  True, the "heading" you noted does say different than my thoughts.  Very interesting.  As an add, I tried to find my old notes on a section of the CCC.  It is about threatening to do something one cannot legally do, is a misdemeanor, punishment can be up to $2500 or 6 months, or both.  I say this as if this is how they can operate now, then they need to be very careful in what they say to the consumer.

 

Though our AG is useless, this does appear to be something she would write up.  She claims she is working hard to rid us of the illegal collectors, yet, she has done nothing about Midland, for example.  I had some members here a couple of years ago who were being "shafted" by a CA in California.  True, I don't know if the members filed their complaints or not, as I've have seen nothing to show they did.  Or, they simply filed with their county DA, as allowed by statute, if a civil attorney is on staff.

 

The whole of the original statement is based on the verbiage in FDCPA 807(2)(a), regarding the misrepresentation of the legal status of the claim.

 

What else is funny, I used the "even attempt . . . . ." just last month for a fellow vet.  Within 10 days he received a letter of apology, saying they will close, and delete.

 

Will it ever end?

 

I'll let you know what I find out.  And, it will not be tomorrow, trust me.

 

And thanks for the reference!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 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.