Help needed finding a 2008 or older Capital One Cardmember agreement

[WreckItRalph]

All,

 

I'm trying to locate a capital one cardmember agreement from *before* they removed the arbitration provisions.  My Capital One account was opened prior to the removal of that provision, which I've read here occurred in 2008(ish).  My account charged off in December 2018, so that is the version of the agreement the JDB filed with the magistrate court.  Of course there is no mention of the arbitration provision in that version.  I am seeking to use the survivability clause that was present in the arbitration clause, so that even though JDB will now claim the 2018 agreement controls, I will be able to show that in fact the Survivability provision means that arbitration is still available to me, and hope that a motion to compel will then be granted on that basis.  The CFPB archive doesn't go back that far, so if anyone can please help, it would be greatly appreciated.  I have seen copy/pastes of the arbitration provision across various threads at various sites (and maybe even here) but I really need an entire agreement.  Thanks for any guidance you can provide.

-W.I.R.

[Harry Seaward]

Capital-One-2008-with-JAMS_&_AAA.pdf

[WreckItRalph]

Thank you, Thank you, Thank you.  A million times, thank you!

 

I think this will be really helpful when I meet for my consultations in the upcoming days.  I truly appreciate this, and will come back with updates as they happen.

 

 

[WreckItRalph]

No update on this case yet, but I was just going through my credit report via Credit Karma, and neither the Transunion  *nor* Equifax credit reports contain any reference to my charged-off Capital One account that I am currently being sued by Midland for.  Is it weird that the OC is no longer present on my reports, even under the "closed" accounts sections where I can see old / closed auto loans, personal loans, and credit cards? ?

 

Thanks!

[Clydesmom]

1 hour ago, WreckItRalph said:

Is it weird that the OC is no longer present on my reports, even under the "closed" accounts sections where I can see old / closed auto loans, personal loans, and credit cards? ?

No it isn't weird.  It is a tactic they use when buying the debts to prevent counter claims to lawsuits.  They delete the trade line during the suit process.  It can always be re-inserted later.

 

[WreckItRalph]

But Midland doesn't have the legal power to delete Capital One's tradeline, do they? Isn't that why we always hear the refrain that JDBs cannot make a pay-for-delete happen , except as to their own collection account entries?  If so, doesn't that indicate that only Capital One could have told the CRAs to delete those accounts ? 

[Harry Seaward]

27 minutes ago, WreckItRalph said:

But Midland doesn't have the legal power to delete Capital One's tradeline, do they?

Great question. I'd like to know the answer to this as well....

[Clydesmom]

16 hours ago, WreckItRalph said:

But Midland doesn't have the legal power to delete Capital One's tradeline, do they?

It is part of the terms of the sale of the account.  The original creditor agrees that once the sale is complete they will delete all trade lines for the sold accounts.  CHASE and CITI do the exact same thing.  So in essence yes, Midland does have the power because if the OC they bought the account from didn't delete and they sued the consumer and got hit with a counter claim based on the trade line that was supposed to be deleted they would have a breach of contract claim against the creditor/seller.

[WreckItRalph]

5 minutes ago, Clydesmom said:

It is part of the terms of the sale of the account.  The original creditor agrees that once the sale is complete they will delete all trade lines for the sold accounts.  CHASE and CITI do the exact same thing.  So in essence yes, Midland does have the power because if the OC they bought the account from didn't delete and they sued the consumer and got hit with a counter claim based on the trade line that was supposed to be deleted they would have a breach of contract claim against the creditor/seller.

So when (if)  I beat Midland, and Midland has to remove its own collection account from my reports, there will literally be no history of the original debt or the collection to be found within my reports, as if the entire thing never happened?  

[Clydesmom]

3 minutes ago, WreckItRalph said:

So when (if)  I beat Midland, and Midland has to remove its own collection account from my reports, there will literally be no history of the original debt or the collection to be found within my reports, as if the entire thing never happened?  

IF the court rules that you do not owe the money you can use that order to get the trade line for Midland removed.  If Midland simply drops the suit they can continue to report.  If the first scenario happens then yes, it would be like it never happened at all unless Cap1 re-inserts their trade line which they can do.