LiftnW8z

Thanks. Going to verify if it's reporting first but if not, that's what I'll slam them with.

OK, so I get this mailer today from Portfolio on a miscellaneous debt. It's this "we're offering you to do this, that, and the other thing to settle the claim." No thanks, guys. Here's the problem. DOFD is 2002. It's beyond both the SOL (4 yrs) and it's beyond reporting limits (7 yrs). I've DV'd them in the past with nothing really consequential presented to convince me it's mine or legit. I've 623'd them, and I'm still getting mail like this. It was at one time on the CR's but went off when the SOL for reporting went by. I have not found out yet if it's back (I just got the mail a few minutes ago and found this letter) on the CR's. I get it that they can try and collect forever and the SOL just prevents legal action on the matter, but this is ridiculous to keep getting mail like this after all this time. Do I just tolerate it, or is there something I can do about it (besides pay them, which I don't intend to do)?

You may or may not be caught in an "update cycle" depending on how long ago the disputes were and all that, but yes, if an item is disputed it is to be reported as such as I understand it. I have one or two in the same boat but they're close to falling off by date alone so I'm not too concerned.

The only time I ever heard from Brachfeld was a letter they sent me on behalf of LVNV...I sent a DV and they folded like a tent in a hurricane. But none the less, they are - from what I've read - pretty sleazy and play fast and loose with the law even though they are lawyers.

Detroit had their shots in game 7, but too many clanks off the post. Just wasn't to be. So instead, it's "Lord Stanley, scratch our names on your fabled Cup!" for the 3rd time for the Pittsburgh Penguins. And how cool is it that Pittsburgh has the Lombardi and the Cup...looks like another run as the City of Champions....

As I understand it, it was reported by the OC and by the CA. OC sold the paper to the CA for collection. The CA is a local one that has an ongoing relationship with the OC in the matter (a bank...the collection is an overdraft account issue) and he worked out arrangements with an attorney that represented the CA...not the OC. Only thing he told me about the agreement is that "the attorney's office does not report, so any reporting will be done 'appropriately' by the CA as warranted." Sounds like he didn't get any kind of iron-clad promise on that one. He claims he was on the verge of getting sued, even though he tried to reach out to both the OC and the CA prior to this agreement. The CA refused to respond in any way, so once he had something to keep it out of the courts, he just took it. Probably a rushed decision...and a PFD was not in the cards. I think he needs to try and get some sort of goodwill, because the reporting is a mess. It's the type of line item mistakes that people have hammered LVNV and scum like that over in 623's...

I tried searching this out, and it seems I must not have been using the right terms. Working with someone to give them some input on "favorable reporting"...we all know the notation "paid collection" is bad news, but what are the more favorable ones? In a nutshell, he's working with a CA that validated the debt, he struck a "loose" agreement (did not show me that) to settle the account, and is now nearing the final payment. He fears getting double-crossed by the CA that they will report "paid collection" or something similarly bad and wants to send a letter out to verify what will be done once the account is paid and try to get some "goodwill favor" (sure...it's a CA...) since he has been diligent and done everything to pay this account off as he promised. What terminology is he looking for...is it "settled", "Paid in full", etc? Slightly OT - He did show me the reporting on Experian, and quite frankly it appears he has violations in that report if he were to pursue them.

I agree - 23 might be a bit much to go after, but hit 6-7 of them and see what comes back, then go on to round 2 in a month or so. Makes it easier for the consumer too I think in terms of tracking the disputes...just my opinion.

I agree with these other 2. You only "won" in the sense that you got the bill reduced by over $1200. The notation of a paid collection is just as bad as any other negative entry, so that's not going to help you. They also need to give you all the documentation of this in writing, because if it happened on the phone, it never happened.

Icanhascheeseburger and the failblog are part of my bookmarks. Always good for a laugh, even if I'm 36.

+1. That's the spirit of a 623...disputing anyone who furnishes data. I'm doing this with Portfolio and perhaps LVNV myself.

I was trying to receive my latest report thru the Equifax website and because of all these login issues and stuff I have to send a hard-copy verification to them before I can get it.

Man, I am sorry to hear this. As one who has been exactly where you are right now I know what you're going thru. You've had some good advice to this point, so I'm not going to repeat any comments. I can only wish I'd have had some of the same kind of counsel when this happened to me, but I did not and I got absolutely raked - but at least I learned from it. I wish you the best of luck.

Oddly, I've never been called by these people, but they sure as heck talk to the CRA's a lot...and in an incorrect manner. And worse yet, never properly validated to me in any way. That's why I'm going to end up 623'ing them and see if that does it.