Sardo Neumspa

First time I've seen these one. A local Popeye's chicken franchise has a sign that says "Pay Less With Cash". It goes on to say that all transactions $5.00 or more will have a 57 cent "Electronic Funds" fee added to the total bill. If you pay with cash, you will receive a 60 cent discount on your purchase. Thus, if your original bill before this fee is $10.00, and they add the 57 cents, they tell you your total is $10.57 everytime. If you pay cash, your final bill will be $9.97. They never ask you what your payment type is during the order. The total always includes 57 cents (as long as the original bill reaches $5.00. The times I have paid cash, I did get a 60 cent discount.

I am fairly confident (99% confident) that the total they put on the 1099-C is the exact amount of the repo deficiency, and it does not include any interest whatsoever, it is the exact total from 2002. The deficiency was for just under $9000, and the tax bill is about $2700. Still, does anyone know where I could go to figure out Fair Market Value of the vehicle in either 2009 or 2002 whichever I need to use for FMV?

1) The repo was in 2002. 2) I am in North Carolina 3) They sent nothing, they folded and deleted off my reports. I still need to know where does Fair Market value need to be calculated from, either 2002 when it was repo'd, or 2009 when they 1099-C'd me when they cancelled the debt. Also, where could I go to find that information?

Looks like I have a lot of reading to do. In 2009, I did not have any real assets (other than retirement). A vehicle which I still owe on. I definitely had more debt (revolving) owed than my assets. I now co-own the home (with my wife) that I live in, however, it was solely in my wife's name in 2009 which was the year the 1099C was issued. (The home was in her name only after inheritance). I see some info regarding "fair market value" of the vehicle. Where would I be able to figure out what the FMV was on the vehicle back during the time it was repo'd, as I would imagine that is when the FMV needs to be measured. It is 8 years and a few months since the vehicle was repo'd.

I had a vehicle repossessed back in 2002 which eventually showed up on my CR as a repo deficiency. Around 2006/07 I joined this board and I used Why Chat's repo deficiency letters to have this removed. I never was served with all of the notices required before the deficiency sale. About a month later, the repo was removed from my credit report. I celebrated that Why Chat's system worked. Fast foward to today. I got a CP2000 Notice from the IRS as apparently the OC sent the IRS a 1099-C for the cancelled debt in 2009 which would have been 7 years from the repo. I never received this 1099-C, thus the first time I am seeing this is the copy on the 1099-C. The IRS is stating that I owe roughly $2700 in taxes due to the unreported income. My question is, is the 1099-C valid? If they did not send me the required notices regarding the repo sale and the like, then the repo was invalid and they lost their ability to persue the repo deficiency. They should not have been able to go the 1099-C route when they cancelled it on their end back in 2009. Regardless, they did. My question is, what I can do at this point. Am I stuck with the full payment to the IRS for the tax owed? Can this be adjusted lower? Can the 1099-C be legally cancelled? thank for the input.

Sadly, Visa now advertises on their site the scam that several of these gas stations are doing now. http://usa.visa.com/personal/using_visa/ch...fees/index.html

If Walmart doesn't have a special deal with Visa/MC, then it is highly unlikely that Sheetz does. The clerk came up with that on top of their head. Report 'em.

I have a similar situation, however it is not yet listed on my credit report. I was "balance billed" for the amount over and above the contracted allowable cost of a procedure. I called my insurance company on Thursday and they were going to handle it with the OC. They are supposed to contact me (my insurance company) about the resolution on Friday. You may want to contact your insurance company which may be able to handle that for you, if the total amount due is directly related to "balance billing".

Went to the hospital in June for an emergency visit. Got billed about a month later from the hospital the proper co-pay amounts. I also was billed from another office apparently for one of the procedures that was performed. I got the EOMBs for each claim, and the hospital one is correct with the proper co-pays that I was responsible for so I paid them. However, the EOMB for the other office showed a balance due that was the amount that insurance said I was not responsible for. After receving the second bill from the 2nd provider, I mailed them a copy of the EOMB showing that I did not owe that amount per the contract between my insurance and the provider. I never heard anything else from them, figuring they saw their error and closed the acct. Fast forward to yesterday. I got dunned by a CA for the amount that my EOMB says I do not have to pay (balance billing). I spoke to my insurance carrier and was instructed to call them back Monday so that they can contact the OC about this with me on the line. (The OC is closed until Monday) I am just about confident that this will be resolved with the OC, but I would think it would be prudent to send a dispute just in case. I believe it would be good to send the dispute to the CA to avoid them posting to my CR while this is being hashed out. I would imagine I would send a dispute letter along with a copy of the EOMB showing the balance is one that I should not have been billed for. Is there already a dispute letter created for this circumstance?

Continuing to assist a friend clean his reports and he has one persistant account with Calvary Portfolio. He sent a request for validation and they responded back with a copy of his final credit card statement from 4-5 years ago from the original creditor. It did not, however, show how they calculated the current amount due on his reports which is about double of what the last credit card statement showed. Obviously they have been continuing to apply interest to the total. Would that be proper validation? Or do they also have to show how they arrived at the new totals as well? Need a plan of action.

A friend asked me this question as I was telling him alot about what I learned here and he gave me a question that I have no idea, nor have I been able to find this situation anywhere... He wants to consolidate his debt with a home equity line of credit. His credit report is clean, just has credit card debt, however his wife's credit apparently is not clean. Charge-offs, collections, etc... The problem is their house that they share is solely in his wife's name as she inherited it after her father's passing. Is it possible for him to successfully gain the line of credit using his credit but using his wife's house as the collateral? I would assume she would need to be a co-signer, but I would think that it would be denied since her credit is not clean. She would co-sign. Does he have a chance in hell to get any sort of approval like this? I would not think so as they would see her report and deny. No mortgage currently exists as the house is paid for. I told him I doubt he could do that but that I would ask here - he has no computer.

http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/healt...7PQLanchO7DiUsT

I'm not sure what is required to be considered a "real" CC fraudster, but for the majority of credit card fraud that takes place at brick-n-mortar stores, the person presenting the card got it by stealing it, which means they'll usually have the remaining contents of the victim's wallet/purse, which also means they'll also have a non-MacGyver matching ID. I'm pretty sure the victims of these crimes would describe their experiences as "real". That being said, brick-n-mortar CC fraud is a very small percentage of the total. Most of it takes place online where a matching ID is irrelevant, but so is a signature for that matter. On a scale of 1-to-10, I would rate showing my ID to make a CC purchase a 2 and having to deal with post-911 security measures at the airport a 9. We all rolled over on having our privacy rights violated because we were told it makes us safer. Just as an "actual CC thief" is unlikely to be discouraged by a merchant asking for ID, "actual" terrorists aren't going to attack us using our airports anymore. Yet we all wait hours and hours at our airports clinging to the idea that we're safer for it. By the way, how often would someone happen to have their CC, but no ID? This is a ridiculous argument. I agree, however, I believe the merchants are doing this for their own protection. To attemp to answer your question... I would say that maybe 10% or less of the individuals with a CC would not have an ID. However, that does not matter anyway. 90% of all merchants refuse to accept credit cards properly and open themselves up to credit card fraud all of the time, including the retailer I work for. Proper acceptance is to compare the signatures on the bottom of the credit card slip to the signature on the back of the card. If they match (or are relatively close) then the transaction is good. If they do not, and if the charge is disputed, it WILL result in a chargeback. The retailer's argument that "Well, we checked the ID of the customer" would be irrelavent. I would rate airport post security measures a 9, and showing identification an 8. The reason is there are also dishonest employees. You pay with your credit card so you give the clerk your number. Now you show the clerk your identification, now they have your birthdate, DL number, full address, zip code, etc... Pretty much what they need to use your card fraudelently online. Also they potentially could attempt to open accounts with that information. Despite popular belief, a SS number is not necessarily needed to run a credit report. There are people out there with photographic memories - my best friend has one.

Georgia statute for open accounts (credit accounts) is 4 years, Tennessee is 3 years. Credit card accounts are open accounts not written contracts. The statute should be from when you stopped paying, if i am not mistaken. It would be your last date of deliquency (Newest). Odds are that your first two accounts are already outside of SOL. Your third one that you actually made payments until 2 years ago may or may not be outside of SOL. Good luck.

deleted double post