SOL? This is almost laughable...

[klhofbauer]

What is the name of your state? Arizona now

This is long; and is my husband's waaaaay old debt.

Residences:

Michigan: 1959 - 9/1988
Florida: 9/88 - 6/01
Arizona: 6/01 - present


I met him in early 1990. We started living together in late 90. Waaaay back then, he had an Amoco credit card - he either applied for this credit card while living in Florida or Michigan. He had filed bk with his first wife, and that was his first card since the bk. He was laid off 1991 - 1992, it was all he could do with odd jobs & unemployment to keep up with his child support so he didn't end up in jail; so this credit card went by the way side.

I THINK that the last payment that was made to Amoco was sometime in either 1992 or 1993 - though, I cannot prove it (I have bank records, paperwork back 8 years, nothing before late 1996).

I know that the very last communication, not a bill or statement we ever received from Amoco or a CA regarding this was sometime in early 1996; but, NO payment was made - he ignored it.

Fast forward to June 2002. We applied for a mortgage and were accepted.

This credit card from Amoco did NOT appear on ANY of the three CRA's, it was that old, if it HAD appeared, it would have dropped off, (7 years) not to mention, the mortgage company would have questioned us, and they didn't. I also had copies of our Credit Report, but just from Equifax, and Amoco wasn't on it - in fact, *laugh* we had forgotten all about it!

Fast forward to June 19th, 2004. Out of the vivid blue sky, there are not one, but TWO standard letters from the same company called "North East Credit & Collection".

Both dated 6/15/04

One has: Re: NCO Financial Systems Great Lakes $526.33
One has: Re: NCO/Assignee of Amoco Oil $526.33

I "assume" they are both regarding the same account - the old, OC of Amoco Oil. Though, I never heard anything about NCO (glad I didn't from reading complaints.com!)

Now.. my question is... before I send this silly idiot company the SOL letter, how do I PROVE it is beyond the SOL - since I have no type of paperwork? (unless I can find those copies of the CR from Equifax from 02, but I haven't so far).

Here's a copy of the letter I plan on sending out.. please advise! Thanks so much!

~~~~~~~~
North East Credit & Collection
120 N. Keyser Avenue
Scranton, PA 18504

Dear Collector,

I am writing in response to your letter dated June 15th, 2004, (copy enclosed) about a certain debt that you are attempting to collect. I have checked with the State Attorney General’s office, through all of my paperwork dating back to 1996, and verified that the legal Statue of Limitations for collecting this type of debt in Florida has expired well over 4 years ago; expiring before we even relocated to the state of Arizona.

Be advised I am aware of my rights in this matter, and consider this letter as official notification that, should you decide to pursue this matter in court, I will invoke my rights and use the "expired statue of limitations" as my defense.

Additionally, be advised that this debt did not appear on any of the three CRA’s during the year 2002 when I applied for a mortgage; the SOL expired and it had fallen off the CRA’s due to the 7 years limit on reporting. Should you attempt to assign this debt to any CRA I will file a lawsuit against you for violation of the FDCA, [Secs. 623, 807] report you to the FTC, and all necessary Attorney General’s offices pursuant to Section 813 of the Fair Debt Collectors Act. Considering that NCO as the original Assignee (whom we’ve never received any type of notice in writing or otherwise from) has been sued for over 1.5 million dollars by the FTC, for violating Section 623(a)(5) of the FCRA, and over 40 times by consumers alone in 2003, with a civil penalty to consumers up to 2,500 per incident, I would advise that no negative reports are listed with any Credit Reporting Agency from NCO, yourselves, or anyone else.

§ 623. Responsibilities of furnishers of information to consumer reporting agencies [15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2]

(a) Duty of furnishers of information to provide accurate information.

(1) Prohibition. Reporting later-than-actual dates may cause negative information to remain in a consumer’s credit file beyond the seven-year reporting period permitted by the FCRA for most information.

Understand that I consider this matter closed and insist that you, or anyone affiliated with your company, or any other collection agency, including the original creditor stop contacting me regarding this or any other matter except to advise me, via postal mail only that your debt collection efforts are being terminated and/or you have removed any negative remarks or tradelines if you so entered them on any Credit Reporting Agencies.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Thank you so much for your help!

 

[Ladynred]

Excellent letter ! At this point, it doesn't really matter whether or not you can prove the SOL has expired, SOL in AZ is 3 years, 4 in FL and 6 (max) in Michigan. The SOL has expired in ALL states regardless. Sounds like you have a pretty good handle on how old this dinosaur debt is, I wouldn't really worry about it unless NCO has the nerve to sue, and for $526 they are NOT going to bother to sue. NCO and its collection flunkies are on a fishing expedition.. only this time they hooked a shark, one who knows its rights !!

 

[klhofbauer]

Excellent letter !

Thanks! I actually found a copy of an SOL letter on a website, and just expanded on it...

At this point, it doesn't really matter whether or not you can prove the SOL has expired, SOL in AZ is 3 years, 4 in FL and 6 (max) in Michigan. The SOL has expired in ALL states regardless.

Q: What happens if they attempt to send me a letter or sue my husband? Also.. I haven't looked at the three CRA's yet - mortgage payment this week.. LOL.. so I have to wait a week or two til I can get them. BUT:

---> 1. What happens if this appears on it? I don't know where to look to try and get negative information removed from the CRA (letters, how-to's, etc...)

---> 2. Where do I start with something that has reached the SOL?

---> 3. How do I tell the CRA that this debt is "SOL"?

Sounds like you have a pretty good handle on how old this dinosaur debt is, I wouldn't really worry about it unless NCO has the nerve to sue, and for $526 they are NOT going to bother to sue. NCO and its collection flunkies are on a fishing expedition.. only this time they hooked a shark, one who knows its rights !!

I do sooo love writing absolutely nasty letters to CA's. I'm pathetic.. *laugh*..

Thank you ladynred!

 

[Ladynred]

You're not pathetic, its perfect !! I'm with ya on that one, especially when the are soooooooooooo stoooooooooooopid. Unfortunately, there are far too many people who would be thrown into a panic over such a letter because they don't know their rights and don't even know that an SOL exists on such things.

What happens if they attempt to send me a letter or sue my husband?

IF they send you any letters other than to tell you they are going away, then you send them an intent to sue letter. Tell them they can avoid court if they'll just write you a check for $1000 for their violations of the FDCPA. If they try to sue, the SOL is your defense and once you use it in court, the onus would be on them to prove otherwise.

1. What happens if this appears on it? I don't know where to look to try and get negative information removed from the CRA (letters, how-to's, etc...)

Considered that NCO just got bitch-slapped by the FTC for illegally re-aging debts, they'd be in BIG trouble, violations of the FCRA, if they put that old thing back on his credit reports. To get things like that removed, you dispute it with the credit bureaus as obsolete, then you send NCO an intent to sue letter, after you file a complaint with the FTC.

Where do I start with something that has reached the SOL? How do I tell the CRA that this debt is "SOL"?

Dispute it as obsolete, it should come off. Check out www.creditboards.com for letters and the how-to's of geurilla credit repair

With a letter like yours, I seriously doubt you'll ever hear from them again. Its funny they say 'assignee' of Amoco - I'd bet Amoco sold this debt a LOOOOOOOOONG time ago.

 

[bigun]

If NCO reaged, collect your $1000. Here's the FTC settlement LIR mentioned.

http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2004/05/ncogroup.htm

 

[klhofbauer]

If NCO reaged, collect your $1000. Here's the FTC settlement LIR mentioned.

http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2004/05/ncogroup.htm

Thanks Bigun!

Okay... let's see, where to begin:

1. I pulled my husband's CR's from Experian and Equifax today.

2. I tried to get the TransUnion online, but it gave me some weird response saying it didn't match up, and they had to verify who he was offline by snail mail - so I guess I'll have to wait for that one.

2. Suprisingly, neither of them have this on - so, I will know from today forward, if anything appears on the credit reports about this way old Amoco bill, I will have a FIELD DAY!

3. His credit actually looks pretty good, compared to my own.. which is par for the course. I have found only 1 item that I intend on disputing, and that is where he is an authorized user on MY Citibank. They are marking it as a charge-off. QUESTION: Are we able to dispute this one? He never signed anything. All I did was simply call Citibank up and ask them to put him on as an "authorized user". In fact, all of the bills were ONLY sent in *my* name.

So.... I am in good shape so far.

I DO have to get all of our old addresses off though - I was able to do that online with Equifax, but Experian says that I have to call or write to get old addresses off. You wouldn't BELIEVE how many they have on the Experian report - along with so many frickin' mis-spellings!

Thanks everyone for the help! By now this CA should have received my SOL letter.. I'm just waiting for the green card back in the mail!

 

[bigun]

QUESTION: Are we able to dispute this one? He never signed anything. All I did was simply call Citibank up and ask them to put him on as an "authorized user". In fact, all of the bills were ONLY sent in *my* name

Oh yeah! This very issue just cost MBNA $90K!

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/4th/031235p.pdf
Johnson v. MBNA America Bank, NA
On 2/11/04, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals handed down its decision in this appeal, affirming a judgment entered against MBNA following a jury verdict in favor of plaintiff Johnson on a claim that MBNA violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act by failing to conduct a reasonable investigation of plaintiff's dispute concerning an MBNA account appearing on her credit report. MBNA's first contention was that the district court made an error when it ruled furnishers of credit information must perform a "reasonable" investigation of consumer disputes. MBNA, in essence, says there isn't a qualitiative component to the investigation provision that would allow a court or jury to assess whether the creditor's investigation was reasonable. The Court went back to the plain meaning of the term "investigation" and concluded it would make little sense to believe that Congress would use the term "investigation" to include superficial, unreasonable inquiries. The court therefore held that creditors must indeed conduct a "reasonable" investigation of their records after receiving notice of a consumer dispute from a credit reporting agency. The next issue, then, was whether the jury's determination that MBNA did not conduct a reasonable investigation was supported by the evidence. The Court looks at the steps MBNA took and finds that a jury could reasonably conclude that MBNA acted unreasonably. Although the disputed credit account was for $17,000, the jury found that Johnson's actual damages stemming from the incorrect information furnished by MBNA totaled $90,300. After finding that MBNA had negligently failed to comply with the FCRA, the jury awarded Johnson $90,300 and that verdict was upheld on appeal. There are many other issues discussed. Read the Court's opinion for complete details.

 

[klhofbauer]

QUESTION: Are we able to dispute this one? He never signed anything. All I did was simply call Citibank up and ask them to put him on as an "authorized user". In fact, all of the bills were ONLY sent in *my* name

Oh yeah! This very issue just cost MBNA $90K!

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/4th/031235p.pdf
Johnson v. MBNA America Bank, NA

oooooooo! I just read the decision! BUT, this is a "community property" state, here in Arizona! When I got the card in July 94, - I got it in MY name. We got married a month later; and then I changed my last name. I actually don't think I even called and asked them to put my husband as an authorized user until about 2 - 3 years later.

That's why I couldn't figure out why this attorney was so insistent on knowing who my husband was, because I was the one who got all of the bills, I was the one who has their name on the account!

I just want to make sure that living in a community property state doesn't affect the fact that this debt is NOT his.