Yungskeeme

Just served papers. Lawsuit from Midland

Recommended Posts

@BV80 @Harry Seaward @Yungskeeme I'm curious. What are your thoughts on what rights Yungskeeme is giving up in this agreement? If you believe there's ambiguity in whether or how Midland can report, could this agreement limit Yungskeeme's right to dispute with the CRAs, or bar any future FDCPA claim against Midland regarding this matter? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Harry Seaward said:

All of them. I can't legally update anything in your credit report, even if what I report is accurate, because I don't have any rights to any of your accounts.

If this were a paternity case, and Parent A was signing away all of their parental rights to the Parent B, Parent A can't demand that, because the child shares his DNA (which is "accurate"), he still has a right to continue to bring gifts to the child on her birthday. 

That’s not true.  You can update what is not not reflected accurately during the time the account was in your possession.  

Again, as an example, an OC who has sold an account can update a piece of information that was incorrect during the time the OC owned the account.   While it no longer owns the account now, it did own the account when it placed the entry.  Giving up rights to the account does not change the fact that the account had a history before the OC gave up its rights.

For instance, while the furnisher owned the account, the date of first delinquency was 07/01/2012, but the entry shows the DOFD as 07/01/2014.  The furnisher can update the incorrect date to show the correct date because that date is what was true when the OC owned it.

You’re paternity example is not the comparable.  To bring the child gifts after you have given up rights implies that you currently have rights to that child and will still have rights in the future.

Correcting inaccurate information on a former entry does not mean the furnisher is currently reporting and does not imply the furnisher has current rights to the account.   The furnisher is not updating in order to reflect current or future information.  It is updating past information to reflect what was accurate while the account was in its possession.  

It would not violate the FCRA because the entry is correct.  It would not violate the FDCPA because reflecting  a -0- balance shows that a debt is not owed.  That would not be an attempt to collect a debt.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m not really understanding the legal terms used. I’m thinking I should just make it clear that I want the account deleted or marked with a 0 balance. Could I do this by emailing them or would I need to type a letter and attach it to the email?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Yungskeeme Wasn't Midland's ownership of this account one of the disputed material facts to be decided by the arbitrator? Negotiating with Midland to update its CRA reporting to show a 0 balance gives Midland the presumption of ownership. Does the 0 balance give you the presumption of having paid it off? Would a 0 balance increase your credit score? Would a deletion of Midland's reporting raise your score more? Is the original creditor reporting? Is yes, what does its report say? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BV80 said:

an OC who has sold an account can update a piece of information that was incorrect during the time the OC owned the account.

There is no agreement between the OC and consumer that the OC releases *all* rights once the debt is sold. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Brotherskeeper said:

@Yungskeeme Wasn't Midland's ownership of this account one of the disputed material facts to be decided by the arbitrator? Negotiating with Midland to update its CRA reporting to show a 0 balance gives Midland the presumption of ownership. Does the 0 balance give you the presumption of having paid it off? Would a 0 balance increase your credit score? Would a deletion of Midland's reporting raise your score more? Is the original creditor reporting? Is yes, what does its report say? 

@Brotherskeeper Main thing I disputed was I denied the debt. Never was provided enough information to prove the debt was mine. Midland bought this debt from the OC. Doesn’t that give them ownership? I feel the “disputed” status they mention does nothing for me. If they can’t prove this debt is mine then I feel the debt should be wiped clean. Deleting or marking the balance as zero would raise my score. Next couple of months I will be buying a house and not having this would help me out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Brotherskeeper said:

Is the original creditor reporting? Is yes, what does its report say? 

You didn't answer this. If the original creditor is not reporting and your settlement with Midland includes deletion, this is the very best outcome. 

1 hour ago, Yungskeeme said:

Never was provided enough information to prove the debt was mine. Midland bought this debt from the OC. Doesn’t that give them ownership?

Well, remaining in court or arbitration would have had a decision rendered by a judge or arbitrator. You decided It was in your best interest not to give a judge the opportunity to rule. Midland certainly believes it purchased a pool of accounts that contained an account with a sum certain belonging to you. Midland decided it really does not want to pay the arb fees, and now can't continue on in court.  A mutual dismissal with prejudice guarantees no fact-finder will ever decide this.

1 hour ago, Yungskeeme said:

Deleting or marking the balance as zero would raise my score. Next couple of months I will be buying a house and not having this would help me out. 

So, you're okay with either 0 balance or deletion. What is the down side of informing Midland that CRA deletion is the change you need to sign the agreement? (You probably already know not to mention the home purchase to them, right?) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Brotherskeeper Sorry I didn’t answer the first question. No, original creditor is not in my CR. It is Midland. 

No downside in informing them that the only way I will sign is if it’s deleted or marked with the balance of 0. I was just asking if mentioning this to them in the email they sent me would suffice. Didn’t know if I had to type a letter up.

And yes, would not mention to them I’m buying a house. Just don’t want to get caught in any loopholes with their legal jargon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Yungskeeme said:

I was just asking if mentioning this to them in the email they sent me would suffice. Didn’t know if I had to type a letter up.

I just reread the settlement agreement you posted. Unless I missed it, I didn't see any language that addresses credit reports being marked as disputed. I am not a lawyer, but I would expect that the document both parties sign would contain the entire and complete terms of agreement between them. I honestly don't know that it matters if you write an email or letter to them to indicate the terms you need included in the formal agreement in order to sign it. Others may have a different opinion. I would make certain to keep a copy for your files. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Brotherskeeper said:

I just reread the settlement agreement you posted. Unless I missed it, I didn't see any language that addresses credit reports being marked as disputed. I am not a lawyer, but I would expect that the document both parties sign would contain the entire and complete terms of agreement between them. I honestly don't know that it matters if you write an email or letter to them to indicate the terms you need included in the formal agreement in order to sign it. Others may have a different opinion. I would make certain to keep a copy for your files. 

Sorry. They sent a cover letter that states that the account would be marked at disputed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Yungskeeme  Check @fisthardcheese 's posts for his suggestions on settlement agreements in exchange for dismissal of JAMS claims. 

As I asked for BV80's and Harry Seaward's thoughts, but didn't get a response, the language of their stipulated agreement may limit your future rights to bring any FDCPA claims against them. This may mean that signing the agreement now and pursuing a possible future FDCPA claim for trade line reporting may be closed off for you.  (IANAL)

If I were in your situation, I would email back a response that states something like:  you received their proposed draft of the joint stipulation for voluntary dismissal with prejudice. If they include in the joint stipulation agreement the additional term of a full and complete deletion of the trade line of this subject account from all credit bureaus to which they report, you will agree to dismiss to your JAMS claim and sign the joint stipulation.  Again, IANAL, but I would want all of the terms of the stipulated agreement to be contained within the 4 corners of the signed document. Others may have a different opinion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Brotherskeeper said:

@Yungskeeme  Check @fisthardcheese 's posts for his suggestions on settlement agreements in exchange for dismissal of JAMS claims. 

As I asked for BV80's and Harry Seaward's thoughts, but didn't get a response, the language of their stipulated agreement may limit your future rights to bring any FDCPA claims against them. This may mean that signing the agreement now and pursuing a possible future FDCPA claim for trade line reporting may be closed off for you.  (IANAL)

If I were in your situation, I would email back a response that states something like:  you received their proposed draft of the joint stipulation for voluntary dismissal with prejudice. If they include in the joint stipulation agreement the additional term of a full and complete deletion of the trade line of this subject account from all credit bureaus to which they report, you will agree to dismiss to your JAMS claim and sign the joint stipulation.  Again, IANAL, but I would want all of the terms of the stipulated agreement to be contained within the 4 corners of the signed document. Others may have a different opinion. 

I agree with having everything clearly stated. I will email them back. Thanks. I’ll be emailing them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Goody_Ouchless said:

Well done. They just want to move on to their 98% default judgments.

 

I’m happy with that. Thanks

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dispute it with the CRAs and send a copy of this dismissal agreement which also goes above by saying you are released of all liability and the CRA will remove the TL.  It's no more complicated than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/18/2019 at 11:41 AM, fisthardcheese said:

Dispute it with the CRAs and send a copy of this dismissal agreement which also goes above by saying you are released of all liability and the CRA will remove the TL.  It's no more complicated than that.

I submitted an online dispute with Equifax in June 1. Results came back 3 days ago. Said it’s not being removed. Kinda what I feared would happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Yungskeeme said:

I submitted an online dispute with Equifax in June 1. Results came back 3 days ago. Said it’s not being removed. Kinda what I feared would happen.

I kind of had the same when i disputed an account with 'Jefferson Capital System'' who purchased a fingerhut account. JCS sent me a letter stating that they ceased all collection of the account and requested CRA's to delete the account. The CRA only deleted the collection account but left the OC account on my report. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Robby8900 said:

I kind of had the same when i disputed an account with 'Jefferson Capital System'' who purchased a fingerhut account. JCS sent me a letter stating that they ceased all collection of the account and requested CRA's to delete the account. The CRA only deleted the collection account but left the OC account on my report. 

Midland is saying all of their information is correct and will mark the account as disputed. Attached the letter to dispute that midland sent me saying they would delete from my credit

Share this post


Link to post
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.