Justin_Otherguy

I am trying to weigh the options of the two. I am in Texas, and at least as of March (when I spoke with a lender) the 80/15/5 option was still available. The conventional loan seems to have the lowest cost per month as well as up front costs. I have made some comparisons using online calculators, but am totally guessing at the rates for the 1st and 2nd liens. I think we would qualify for top tier rates as we both have high FICOs, high 7s/low 8s. But I am not sure what those rates might be for 1st and 2nd? Is there any way to estimate that? Just the idea of not having to pay PMI or MPI and the upfront costs of FHA is appealing. What am I missing for the downside? The 2 liens going in? anything else? Thanks-

So we are looking at a house that has had a lot of work done by the current owner, but they now have it on the market. Built in 70's and desperately needs to have the electrical updated to modern standards. The whole system is ungrounded. Will take around $12k I'm told. I wanted to know if there was any program or loan available besides an FHA 203K Rehab or the streamlined version of that program that would let you roll repair costs into the mortgage. Or, can one take out a loan after purchase of property as a separate loan? Ideally, I would like the work done before moving in, and my schedule allows flexibility in that respect. I have run across a Title I loan for repairs up to $20K I think it was, but the interest rates seemed high. Any other good ways to do this? Thanks!

Howdy ya'll fellow Texans ! Subbing... Good stuff Ashlia once again.

I believe a CA can pull your credit if they have an account of yours, or allegedly yours. This gives them permissible purpose, as much as that sucks.

Ashlia- What would you say is your success rate with that approach? Have you ever actually received a monetary settlement without having to file the suit?

Congrats ashlia!!

What has happened to date: I was waiting on dispute results from EX. This has come back as UPDATED, and now reflects as "in dispute, reported by subscriber" on my EX report. This is actually on CCT that I use for daily monitoring. A few questions: 1. Now forgive my ignorance on this point, but if this JDB owns the "debt" (as they state in their initial response) how can the OC be held responsible? 1a. I found what company owns the brand that is listed as the OC and the contact information is said to be on jigsaw.com but I've not signed up yet. 2. I thought the TX method was to now send ITS to JDB outlining violations and placing on 60 day notice for DTPA, copying their bondholder, put them on 60 day notice, and attempt to apply leverage that way. I may be missing something. 2a. On that note, I don't know if there are any violations aside from the fact that the JDB could not validate properly, IMO. However, TFC392 doesn't seem to actually require validation at all. When using TFC392, do all FDCPA requirements go out the window? 2b. The JDB may have violated 392.202(e) in that all I have received from them was their initial "validation" in response to my dispute. I have nothing from them telling me that they are reporting accurately after their investigation. And they never did stop reporting, they just marked it in dispute within 30 days, is that good enough? 3. I have letters almost ready to go for the JDB, bond company, and to the TX OAG, all of which I was going to include in next correspondence with JDB. Thanks for the input.

I called it ....went to "Ken" and sounds like a cell phone number - and he just says he is away from his desk. But you get that cell phone recording once he talks saying record your message at the tone. I called from a blocked number. I think its a VOIP number. That seems to be the business of the phone company associated with the number. Thanks for the help.

408-886-7000 San Jose, CA. I used phonevalidator.com and found out that the phone company is GLOBAL CROSSING LOCAL SERVICES INC, and that it is an unpublished number. Was of course, all over google and other search engines, to no avail. Haven't called it back yet, but got a message from "Ken" today who asked me to call him back. I can only assume its a JDB of some sort. Anyone know it?

I have had success with cleaning up my reports, yes. BIG thanks to CB!! This is the first time I have used TFC. Although I am originally from here, I lived in another state for the past 10 years or so. Just moved back here last year and my credit was squeaky clean when this little problem popped up. But whether FDCPA and FCRA, or TFC 392 and BCC 20 and 17, I think they all take patience and produce a fair amount of frustration as a side effect. But hang in there, it will happen. Either by your hand, or they will just die of old age. Sometimes, ya just get plain lucky.

Thanks. I have read all the centex/walter threads until my eyes bled, so I think I am good with the overall concept. I tend to get lost in the minutia of every last sentence. Centex referred to the double barrel approach where you basically put everything in the first letter and dare them to breathe, but then she has a flare for that. I tended to go a little more Walter with mine because of lack of clear up front violations. Anyway, your threads are always informative, so thank you.

So how do you determine a dollar amount so early in the process? For me, I just had a JDB show up on my reports and the TL didn't have any obvious violations so I just DV'd referencing tfc392. Didn't copy bond holder or anything the first time and their initial 30 days is almost up. I have a few violations now, I think, because they didn't properly validate, among other things. I'm about to send my ITS and DTPA notice, but am still having a little trouble coming up with a suitable amount. I don't want to be too high or low to be reasonable. It's for an alleged $100 amount.

I have read on several websites about about this particular JDB running this sort of scam on consumers. Let me clarify that. If I actually ever purchased anything from this company (I honestly don't remember), it would have been AT LEAST 10 or more years ago. The CA is claiming this debt originated in '06. NO WAY is it from anything I purchased. I believe it to be completely bogus.

I have read on several websites about about this particular JDB running this sort of scam on consumers.