Judgement Gone Belly Up!!

[nicolia]

Reread

JETX....reread the original post. The person clearly states that a collection agency was responsible for reporting the debt.

Since a collection agency has reported this debt, most of your rantings (while 100% correct) simply don't hold water. You and I are not arguing apples-to-apples...but you don't seem to care.

My posts are still accurate and will work on removing this negative comment.

 

[nicolia]

Prove my point

Appraisals...do exactly as I stated in my posts....wait 30 days and report back to JETX for me.

What will happen here is that the CRA will send a letter to the collection agency asking for proof for negative comment. Since the agency is no longer in business, I would bet they do not send anything back. Thirty days will pass and you can demand the negative comment removed.

Another tip: Do this all via the Web. If you do this on the CRA Websites, it will happen faster as you can sumbit the investigation request online and the clock starts ticking immediately. Then note the date and call them in 30 days and have them remove the "ding".

 

[nicolia]

More tips

Actually, depending upon the month this was reported in 1998, you might be able to soon have the comment removed simply because it has been past the designated 7 years....no matter what...PERIOD!

CRAs will not automatically remove old comments...you have to request they be removed.

The legal time allowed by CRAs is 7 years FROM THE FIRST MOMENT YOU WERE LATE, OR FIRST REPORTED. Even if the agency tries to update an aging record (i.e. making the last entry only a few years old), you can challenge a negative comment and have it removed if the FIRST/ORIGINAL comment is older than 7 years.

 

[JETX]

JETX....reread the original post. The person clearly states that a collection agency was responsible for reporting the debt.

No he doesn't. The original post makes reference to a 'Collection Co.'. And though it certainly implies that a collection AGENCY may be involved, I can tell you from experience that is very likely NOT the case and the use of that term ('Collection Co') more than likely refers to the judgment OWNER. Do you know why that is likely?? Because unless the 'collection company' is the owner, they are an agent of the creditor. And an 'agent' can't take legal action for the owner as that would be UPL (Unauthorized/Unlicensed Practice of Law).

Since a collection agency has reported this debt, most of your rantings (while 100% correct) simply don't hold water. You and I are not arguing apples-to-apples...but you don't seem to care.

Oh, I do care. That is why I am still trying to educate you on the fact that you simply cannot go blindly forward assuming facts that are not correct, or more likely, mis-stated by those who post to this forum. After all, there is no expectation that they would know the difference between a judgment creditor or 'collection co.' in this case.

My posts are still accurate and will work on removing this negative comment.

My post stands. And hopefully, you will learn and become an asset to this forum.

 

[nicolia]

Thanks to JETX

After taking my own advise and rereading the first post, I see that I assumed the person was discussing a collection agency. Through JETX's insight, I see that I was mistaken in this assumption.

I still believe that the tactic will work when the Collection Co. does not return the letter...however, I may be wrong on this assumption as well.

I do know that the time limit is quickly approaching and Appraisals will definitely be able to have the comment removed at the 7 year mark.

 

[JETX]

Actually, depending upon the month this was reported in 1998, you might be able to soon have the comment removed simply because it has been past the designated 7 years....no matter what...PERIOD!

Before you continue trying to offer your 'debt advice', I really, REALLY suggest you read and understand the FCRA before you mislead others with your errors and confusion.

If you did, you would KNOW that a judgment is not a 'normal' debt and can be shown on a debtors credit history for the longer of its validity OR 7 years. Per the FCRA
"§ 605. Requirements relating to information contained in consumer reports
(a) Information excluded from consumer reports. Except as authorized under subsection (b) of this section, no consumer reporting agency may make any consumer report containing any of the following items of information:
(2) Civil suits, civil judgments, and records of arrest that from date of entry, antedate the report by more than seven years or until the governing statute of limitations has expired, whichever is the longer period."

Since an Oregon judgment is valid for 10 years... and renewable, it can theoretically remain on the debtors credit history FOREVER!!

The legal time allowed by CRAs is 7 years FROM THE FIRST MOMENT YOU WERE LATE, OR FIRST REPORTED.

And, of course, that is NOT CORRECT!
Again, you need to read and UNDERSTAND the FCRA.
A debt can be reported on a credit file per the FCRA (also per § 605):
"(c) Running of Reporting Period
(1) In general. The 7-year period referred to in paragraphs (4) and (6)
3 of subsection (a) shall begin, with respect to any delinquent account that is placed for collection (internally or by referral to a third party, whichever is earlier), charged to profit and loss, or subjected to any similar action, upon the expiration of the 180-day period beginning on the date of the commencement of the delinquency which immediately preceded the collection activity, charge to profit and loss, or similar action.".

And since you seem totally ignorant of the FCRA and its requirements, you can find it at:
http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/031224fcra.pdf

 

[JETX]

I do know that the time limit is quickly approaching and Appraisals will definitely be able to have the comment removed at the 7 year mark.

You made this ERRONEOUS post while I was trying to correct your OTHER erroneous post.
I refer you to my previous post providing an explanation of your ERROR in this one.
Your providing ERRORS in your 'advice' to others is pathetic!!

 

[nicolia]

Oh for F sake

So I left out the 180 day part....I was more interested in getting across to the person that the laws had changed in 1997.

Prior to that, the 7 years period started when the company actually took the charge off.....not when the company first started collection actions....or even when the person was first listed as being late...

 

[nicolia]

And what you're forgetting...

JETX...what you're fforgetting here is that I do this for people all the time. I deal in real world law...not text book law.

I can almost guarantee that Appraisals will be successful if he challenges the negative mark and the collection co. does not respond in 30 days. It may not be technically accurate to the true word of law as written, but it still works in the real world.

 

[JETX]

So I left out the 180 day part....I was more interested in getting across to the person that the laws had changed in 1997.

HUH??? Where does that become relevant??? It only shows that you don't know the laws nearly as well as you thought you do.

Prior to that, the 7 years period started when the company actually took the charge off.....not when the company first started collection actions....or even when the person was first listed as being late...

And of course, what the law USED TO BE has absolutely NOTHING to do with this thread... other than to show that you don't know the CURRENT laws you try to use.

We are still awaiting your response to all the OTHER errors you have provided in this thread.... or are you going to simply ignore them??

 

[nicolia]

What's pathetic

What's pathetic is telling someone not to try something that might very well end up helping them out......especially at a low cost of around $40 total to have it removed in just 30 days.

 

[JETX]

JETX...what you're fforgetting here is that I do this for people all the time. I deal in real world law...not text book law.

And what the hell does that mean??? I have already shown that you are legally ignorant and that you have NO business offering any LEGAL advice to anyone on this forum.
There is nothing that I can do to help the 'people' you claim to be helping off-forum..... other than to hope that some of them read this forum and recognize you and the fact that you are proven to be legally incompetent.

I can almost guarantee that Appraisals will be successful if he challenges the negative mark and the collection co. does not respond in 30 days. It may not be technically accurate to the true word of law as written, but it still works in the real world.

Gee, lets see. What value can anyone put to an 'almost guarantee' from an anonymous person on the internet??? Not much in my opinion.

Tell ya' what.... I think that your error-filled posts are a danger to those on the forum. Lets see what I can do to remedy that little 'problem'.