39 replies to this topic

[mbl280]

Yep, I know they're "out there". It's been four years so hopefully they won't come to collect.

[pchef33]

All of these phone calls and online disputes are making me hyper ventilate. If something gets reinserted, you'll have no paper trail.

I sent letters and initiated a online dispute, that way I have a paper trail.

[LKH]

All of these phone calls and online disputes are making me hyper ventilate. If something gets reinserted, you'll have no paper trail.

I sent letters and initiated a online dispute, that way I have a paper trail.

I wouldn't do that. If you dispute one way then send in another dispute a different way, the CRA's will consider that "additional info" whether it is or not, and add another 15 days to the dispute timeline.

[LKH]

All of these phone calls and online disputes are making me hyper ventilate. If something gets reinserted, you'll have no paper trail.

Bingo!! We have a winner!

[LKH]

All of these phone calls and online disputes are making me hyper ventilate. If something gets reinserted, you'll have no paper trail.

They said they will email me once the changes have taken effect.

But you don't have copies of written disputes...you have no certified mail green cards...

all you have is the CRA's word...yikes.

Maybe I just learned "old school"(or as Lt. VanBuren would say "the right way,") but, IMO all disputes should be in writing, and sent CMRRR. Look, I've been there, I had thirty plus deletions in less than a year, and a fantastic success story to post on CB...and I have FOLDERS full of documentation to back all this up....good thing too...I've needed it a few times. Good luck. YMMV.

Not everyone has TX law or TFC at their disposal, I too am like u paper trail etc..

TFC does not apply to a credit reprting agency. I used Jack Attack, SOL, and Why Chat's Judgement Letter among others. If you are getting a paper trail, that is great. Some of the other posters in this thread are not, and that could be a mistake. Only pointing out it isn't a bad thing to have. YMMV.

As u say ymmv, I say each to their own..
A lot of folks are more focused on a clean report as opposed to making sure the fire is out, who am I to say what 1 should do or not do?
If they clean their reports great, but at the end of the day as as someone's name is a piece of paper out there some where there will be someone tryn to collect on it regardless of SOL.. Lol it's an ever ending battle huh?
IMO whychat is the man as far as I'm concerned, he has opened my eyes up to a lot of things, so hands down to him! I have personally tried the jack attack and no results, so I can't comment too much on it (restarted it again JA) so I'll wait for the second round of results (1 baddie left ) as u say ymmv!

Who are you to say what one should or should not do? That is a full load. Once again, if you are going to play guru, play it right. No, it's not an ever ending battle if you do things the right way. Your method, which has been around for years and years, is trouble looming. Until recently, you never mentioned the fact that the judgements were still valid and out there despite being deleted from a report. Not everyone who used "your method", knows this. When the judgement slaps them upside the head, they will know but there are many who think it's over since it's been deleted.

[ashlia]

All of these phone calls and online disputes are making me hyper ventilate. If something gets reinserted, you'll have no paper trail.

They said they will email me once the changes have taken effect.

But you don't have copies of written disputes...you have no certified mail green cards...

all you have is the CRA's word...yikes.

Maybe I just learned "old school"(or as Lt. VanBuren would say "the right way,") but, IMO all disputes should be in writing, and sent CMRRR. Look, I've been there, I had thirty plus deletions in less than a year, and a fantastic success story to post on CB...and I have FOLDERS full of documentation to back all this up....good thing too...I've needed it a few times. Good luck. YMMV.

Not everyone has TX law or TFC at their disposal, I too am like u paper trail etc..

TFC does not apply to a credit reprting agency. I used Jack Attack, SOL, and Why Chat's Judgement Letter among others. If you are getting a paper trail, that is great. Some of the other posters in this thread are not, and that could be a mistake. Only pointing out it isn't a bad thing to have. YMMV.

As u say ymmv, I say each to their own..
A lot of folks are more focused on a clean report as opposed to making sure the fire is out, who am I to say what 1 should do or not do?
If they clean their reports great, but at the end of the day as as someone's name is a piece of paper out there some where there will be someone tryn to collect on it regardless of SOL.. Lol it's an ever ending battle huh?
IMO whychat is the man as far as I'm concerned, he has opened my eyes up to a lot of things, so hands down to him! I have personally tried the jack attack and no results, so I can't comment too much on it (restarted it again JA) so I'll wait for the second round of results (1 baddie left ) as u say ymmv!

Who are you to say what one should or should not do? That is a full load. Once again, if you are going to play guru, play it right. No, it's not an ever ending battle if you do things the right way. Your method, which has been around for years and years, is trouble looming. Until recently, you never mentioned the fact that the judgements were still valid and out there despite being deleted from a report. Not everyone who used "your method", knows this. When the judgement slaps them upside the head, they will know but there are many who think it's over since it's been deleted.

Duh, I never said it was my method...I even said its been around for awhile too..u need to read some lkh..u say Chevy I say Gm, u say mercury I say ford! That's how I look at things!

Good move, newbie, telling the Site Owner to read more. Not cool.

[kal el]

a person can't defend themselves? I'm not doing any calling or online disputes but this method seems to have worked for more than it hasn't and if people want to do it this way knowing how it can effect the future then so be it. It's their credit and their problem.

Everyone has different circumstances and can beat to their own drum how they see fit.

Edited by kal el, 02 March 2012 - 11:23 AM.

[ashlia]

a person can't defend themselves? I'm not doing any calling or online disputes but this method seems to have worked for more than it hasn't and if people want to do it this way knowing how it can effect the future then so be it. It's their credit and their problem.

Everyone has different circumstances and can beat to their own drum how they see fit.

Telling the site owner "maybe you should read more" sounds a lot more like arrogance and hubris than self defense, IMO.

Anyway, if the blind want to follow the blind so be it. Good luck to you all when the accounts get reinserted and you have no paper trail to have them removed.

Dollar Bill may say crap, and I may say poop...it's still shit in the end.

Sorry, LKH and Breeze. I'll consider myself warned.

Edited by ashlia, 02 March 2012 - 11:52 AM.

[LKH]

All of these phone calls and online disputes are making me hyper ventilate. If something gets reinserted, you'll have no paper trail.

They said they will email me once the changes have taken effect.

But you don't have copies of written disputes...you have no certified mail green cards...

all you have is the CRA's word...yikes.

Maybe I just learned "old school"(or as Lt. VanBuren would say "the right way,") but, IMO all disputes should be in writing, and sent CMRRR. Look, I've been there, I had thirty plus deletions in less than a year, and a fantastic success story to post on CB...and I have FOLDERS full of documentation to back all this up....good thing too...I've needed it a few times. Good luck. YMMV.

Not everyone has TX law or TFC at their disposal, I too am like u paper trail etc..

TFC does not apply to a credit reprting agency. I used Jack Attack, SOL, and Why Chat's Judgement Letter among others. If you are getting a paper trail, that is great. Some of the other posters in this thread are not, and that could be a mistake. Only pointing out it isn't a bad thing to have. YMMV.

As u say ymmv, I say each to their own..
A lot of folks are more focused on a clean report as opposed to making sure the fire is out, who am I to say what 1 should do or not do?
If they clean their reports great, but at the end of the day as as someone's name is a piece of paper out there some where there will be someone tryn to collect on it regardless of SOL.. Lol it's an ever ending battle huh?
IMO whychat is the man as far as I'm concerned, he has opened my eyes up to a lot of things, so hands down to him! I have personally tried the jack attack and no results, so I can't comment too much on it (restarted it again JA) so I'll wait for the second round of results (1 baddie left ) as u say ymmv!

Who are you to say what one should or should not do? That is a full load. Once again, if you are going to play guru, play it right. No, it's not an ever ending battle if you do things the right way. Your method, which has been around for years and years, is trouble looming. Until recently, you never mentioned the fact that the judgements were still valid and out there despite being deleted from a report. Not everyone who used "your method", knows this. When the judgement slaps them upside the head, they will know but there are many who think it's over since it's been deleted.

Duh, I never said it was my method...I even said its been around for awhile too..u need to read some lkh..u say Chevy I say Gm, u say mercury I say ford! That's how I look at things!

No, you may not have said in so many words that it is your method, but members here for some reason think it is. I may need to read more but you need to learn more, a lot more. I really, at this point, don't care how you look at things.
You always seem to pick the smallest point to respond to. You NEVER respond to the major points. Maybe, you should read my post some more.

And with that, I really don't want to argue about it. The point needs to be made that when giving advice, all possible positive and negative outcomes need to be mentioned, especially when dealing with judgements. There will be some that had a judgement deleted that will come back months later and tell us how they got clobbered by the judgement holder because once they had it deleted from their reports, they figured it was over.

[ljayatl96]

Well when I joined back in 2004 I had NO CLUE to any of the "methods" or processes. It took me years to get a handle on how the FCRA works and I still have a lot to learn when it comes to what we are all trying to accomplish. Which I believe is to remove false information or incorrect info on our reports. Some of us get items removed via many different methods only to have a reinsertion or get served by just trying to DV the CA. Personally knock on wood I have not had that happen. YET!

So what I did was follow or "lurk" if you will the members that were making things happen. There are quite a few of them WhyChat,Marv,LKH,Breeze and most recently ****. I do not personally know any of you outside of CB. I saw that the "method" that has been around for awhile working for some and not for others. I am an educated adult and can and will make my own decisions. I know that even though I get a PR or a CA removed from my report there is always the day that it can come back to bite me in the A**. Yes it is still on some computer somewhere waiting to be paid.

After all are we not on here to help each other and help the "newbie". Not knowing what half or even a quarter what some of you do i try different ways to accomplish what this board is all about. I do not stick to one if it does not work for me I try something else. My absolute toughest to date was LVNV it took AG and BBB finally to get it removed. Unfortunately I can't recall who I followed to get that process. It worked though. But it may not work for you.

More importantly I posted about my situation with the two PR's I have on all three. **** saw this and shot me a PM with his number not even knowing who I was period. So I called him and we spoke for quite some time about my situation. To date the two on EX GONE! One left on TU and believe or not I am having more of a problem with EQ so they still remain. Yes I have asked for a reinvestigation. Fortunately or not I was able to opt out of Lexis/Nexis.

Yes I was taking a chance talking to someone who I did not know but do we not do that every time we sign on and ask for help. He gave me the options and it was my choice to try them or not. I completely believe in a paper trail. I still have paperwork from 6 years ago. In fact I am currently using Pre-Hipaa letter for a med collection from a very respectable member. I hope it works if not then I will step back assess then try again.


I don't want to get flamed or banned or even warned for that matter. I am thick skinned and can take what is given to me. I am just stating my opinion on what has worked for me. No I am not being a cheerleader for just one person. We all have our ways. So just because you don't like something someone does it does not mean if will not work for someone else. After all we would not be on here if we had perfect credit.

[LKH]

All of these phone calls and online disputes are making me hyper ventilate. If something gets reinserted, you'll have no paper trail.

They said they will email me once the changes have taken effect.

But you don't have copies of written disputes...you have no certified mail green cards...

all you have is the CRA's word...yikes.

Maybe I just learned "old school"(or as Lt. VanBuren would say "the right way,") but, IMO all disputes should be in writing, and sent CMRRR. Look, I've been there, I had thirty plus deletions in less than a year, and a fantastic success story to post on CB...and I have FOLDERS full of documentation to back all this up....good thing too...I've needed it a few times. Good luck. YMMV.

Not everyone has TX law or TFC at their disposal, I too am like u paper trail etc..

TFC does not apply to a credit reprting agency. I used Jack Attack, SOL, and Why Chat's Judgement Letter among others. If you are getting a paper trail, that is great. Some of the other posters in this thread are not, and that could be a mistake. Only pointing out it isn't a bad thing to have. YMMV.

As u say ymmv, I say each to their own..
A lot of folks are more focused on a clean report as opposed to making sure the fire is out, who am I to say what 1 should do or not do?
If they clean their reports great, but at the end of the day as as someone's name is a piece of paper out there some where there will be someone tryn to collect on it regardless of SOL.. Lol it's an ever ending battle huh?
IMO whychat is the man as far as I'm concerned, he has opened my eyes up to a lot of things, so hands down to him! I have personally tried the jack attack and no results, so I can't comment too much on it (restarted it again JA) so I'll wait for the second round of results (1 baddie left ) as u say ymmv!

Who are you to say what one should or should not do? That is a full load. Once again, if you are going to play guru, play it right. No, it's not an ever ending battle if you do things the right way. Your method, which has been around for years and years, is trouble looming. Until recently, you never mentioned the fact that the judgements were still valid and out there despite being deleted from a report. Not everyone who used "your method", knows this. When the judgement slaps them upside the head, they will know but there are many who think it's over since it's been deleted.

Duh, I never said it was my method...I even said its been around for awhile too..u need to read some lkh..u say Chevy I say Gm, u say mercury I say ford! That's how I look at things!

No, you may not have said in so many words that it is your method, but members here for some reason think it is. I may need to read more but you need to learn more, a lot more. I really, at this point, don't care how you look at things.
You always seem to pick the smallest point to respond to. You NEVER respond to the major points. Maybe, you should read my post some more.

I have.. Aren't we here for the same thing? A "clean credit report"? If "ethics"is such a concern then why DV to a debt when in fact 1 knows its their debt to begin with? We all make mistakes, it's life! Heck I even had a judgement I was sued because auto insurance didn't wanna cover all of the bill, thus I sued the insurance company for not doing the logical thing (Florida has a no fault incase if u were wondering) and after judgement was paid it it wouldn't even show up as PAID (go figure)..I do not take credit for this method, but I was able to figure this out from 2 people 1 of them was whychat and the other was an attorney and after doing some more home work it panned out..reinsertion can happen to anyone at anytime, do u think the CRA cares if 1 person sues? Nope.. I did what worked, and told the world, hoping it would HELP other people! So far so good huh? Lol here's the best part, a guy DV a CA and then he gets served? Where's the justice in that? So much for DVing huh, poor guy was using what the fdcpa and "board members" said and poof the man got served by a JDB...at the end of the day it's US vs THEM (CRA's,CA's and JDB's)
I am by far no guru, but I can tell u a lot about EX and EQ and I mean ALOT ( played with bullseye and seen first hand how it works to find debtors) EQ is just as simple, TU I haven't had to worry about, and I don't plan on it either!

Simple answer to your nonsensical retort: DV'ing is right afforded by the FDCPA and if they can't prove it, then there is a problem. We, the admin and mods do NOT advise people to DV when still within the SOL. And if someone does and the CA sues them, then the CA better have valid proof. That still isn't the point. Up until the time breeze mentioned that a deleted judgement doesn't mean the judgement has gone away, you never mentioned anything of the sort and if you did, we didn't see it. Recently you have.
So why DV a debt someone knows is theirs? Why dispute a tradeline someone knows is theirs? Because the law says if they can't prove it, they must remove it. Further, if they can't prove it via DV and they sue, a person would have defense, wouldn't they?

You continuously try to change the topic of discussion. We were talking about disputing judgements. I don't think anyone here will tell a member not to dispute a judgement. Apparently you've lost the whole point behind the original post.

I am not against you advising people to dispute judgements via the 'same name" dispute. Not hardly. I am against it being all done privately, as I already stated to you, as there are many others out there who may benefit who don't post. And my other gripe was the fact that judgements don't disappear with disputes. Period. End of story.

[MarvBear]

This from LKH

I am not against you advising people to dispute judgements via the 'same name" dispute. Not hardly. I am against it being all done privately, as I already stated to you, as there are many others out there who may benefit who don't post. And my other gripe was the fact that judgements don't disappear with disputes. Period. End of story.

DB: surely you can't be that dense.

You post, you make it public, or you don't post at all. Period. End of story.

[MarvBear]

1330872473[/url]' post='4635933']
This from LKH

I am not against you advising people to dispute judgements via the 'same name" dispute. Not hardly. I am against it being all done privately, as I already stated to you, as there are many others out there who may benefit who don't post. And my other gripe was the fact that judgements don't disappear with disputes. Period. End of story.

DB: surely you can't be that dense.

You post, you make it public, or you don't post at all. Period. End of story.

Lol, now u marv that I'm not that dense, I use pm's to send a "private messages not intended for the world to see" and no i dont send pics of myself incase if anyone is wondering lol..I have used a pm to send answers to folks so that way they can get the answer they were looking for cause there's a delay in my posts getting posted lol...oh well at this point it is what it is, however Marv I called u other day to say hi and if see if u were up to lunch (my treat, any where u wanted except Ruth's Chris steakhouse lol) and u didn't pick up and I didn't wanna bother u at work either

My blackberry phone log, has NO RECORD OF YOUR CALL.

I been here almost 10 years, and I seldom find it necessary to send a PM. Anything I got to say, I'll say in open forum.

That's how WE ROLL.

[breeze]

Folks - we do not want you to get hurt by advice you get on CB. Many people do not understand about judgments and what a creditor can do once they have one. Some of these people (consumers) are quite likely to believe the judgment is gone forever because it's off their report. They relax, put all their money back in the bank, continue their direct deposit and whammo - they get hit with a writ of execution, or HR calls them in one day and says "we have received a garnishment on your pay." Many states do not require any notice to you at all - the creditor can just do it. We want to make sure people know that could (and probably will) happen.

A quick fix is one thing. Lying on an employment app or credit app is totally different. If you are asked if you have ever had a judgment, you still have to answer "yes" even if it has been removed from your reports. Don't fool yourselves with this little quickie deal. It's fun to beat the system, but it's a not a foundation for improving your credit. Judgments have to be dealt with or lived with, and there are ways to do both, but you can't be fooling yourself about what you're doing, you have to know.

We did not single out DB just to be mean - any time anyone posts repeatedly "call me" "PM me your number" "PM me and I'll tell you" we pay attention, because chances are, the person knows that what they're telling you is questionable, and that we would step in.

[MarvBear]

My blackberry archives my voice mails until I delete them. You haven't left me any voice mails either. So I'd appreciate it, you stop with your nonsense.

You are not welcome to come see me.