C.S. Hander

I have a Discover card account that I haven't used in about six years. I pay attention to their offers, but there hasn't been anything that has interested me. A week ago, I got a letter date Dec 16 saying that if I didn't use the account within 30 days that it would be closed due to inactivity. Not wanting to lose the 11,000 credit line, I pulled out my card to use it, and as I am purchasing something online I see that the card expired in September, and I never received a replacement. So I call cust svc to request a replacement card, and the automated status says my credit line is zero. So I talk to the rep, and she says my account is closed as of Dec 16th. She said she was not able to reactivate it, and I would need to talk to the "Operations Portfolio Review" dept on Monday (the dept signing the letter). So I call the cust svc rep and asked to be transferred to the "Operations Portfolio Review" department, and the rep had never heard of it. After searching and not finding a listing for that department, I asked him what his policy was regarding account re-activations, who he would talk to in that case and he said "I would just reactivate it, oh wait, it won't let me do that for some reason". He then transferred me to retention, and after a brief explanation retention transferred me to the Operations Portfolio Review department. After explaining the letter I received, I was told the letter was an error, and that I did not have 30 days, that my account had already been canceled. The rep tried to explain to me that the letter did say my account had been already closed, just that the 30 days was wrong, to which I told her that is a completely different interpretation of this letter, and that it was not reasonable for someone to interpret the letter that way. She told me there was no possibility of reopening the account, and I would have to reapply if I wanted a card. I asked for a supervisor, which turned out to be busy but would call me when available. I continued with the first rep and she asked "What can I do to make you happy?" I told her that she could honor the letter that they sent, to which she told me she would have to perform a financial review including my credit report, employment history and housing history before reactivating the account. I told her that Discover already could pull my credit report for review, but that it should not be necessary to perform a review like that to continue an account I already have had for 14 years. She replied that "In these difficult financial times, we need to perform these verifications before reopening an account". I told her that was not acceptable and gave her my number for the supervisor to call back (promised within 24 hours, but haven't got one yet). It seems clear to me that there is something else going on here. I have a 734 credit score, and no problems on my credit report. The absolute terms she used when saying the account could not possibly be reopened were surprising, as was the fact that the letter was an "error" and that there agents don't have knowledge of this department. It's not too troubling to lose this account, but this doesn't seem to me like normal "closed due to inactivity" situation and I wonder what the real story is. Has anyone else encountered these letters yet?

I managed to settle with Unifund for $591. That was the original amount of the debt from Providian before all the interest and fees was added on. I had looked up the actual text of the California Civil Code dealing with Statute of Limitations, and unfortunately it wasn't much help. The Civil Code text specifies that the SOL starts from date of last activity, but doesn't define "activity". Some sites on the internet define the start point as "activity", some define it as last payment date. I spoke with someone from the Attorney's office that is handling the Unifund case and told her that they were beyond the SOL for filing the case, but that I would have to hire an attorney to file the papers to fight it which would cost money. I offered to settle for the original amount of the Providian account, which was still considerably more than what Unifund paid for it. The Attorney's office told me that Unifund doesn't take what they paid for the account as a factor. However, the offer was sent to Unifund and they accepted it the same day.

My wife said that the summons was found in the bushes of her parent's house. I got a copy of the proof of service, and it says three visits no lights on (during the day, no lights - imagine that?) and that it was finally served on a male who refused to identify themselves, 5'8", average weight, no hair color. Her father is the only male in the house, and he is 6'9" late 50s with gray hair. Kinda hard to miss. Then the process server also said that he mailed a copy, which was never received. Unfortunately, my wife didn't know anything about what to do (and no one to turn to for advice) and so she contacted them for proof of their claim, which they promptly mailed the day after the default judgment was passed... she didn't take any further action. When the garnishment showed up, I figured I better take care of it.

After looking over this some more, I saw that the account was originally reported in delinquent status in April of 2002. Unifund filed June 26, 2006. Statue of limitations is four years, so I contacted Unifund's rep regarding this and they said that last activity was August 19, 2002. I looked at the statement they sent, and it was a payment that was NSF, so in effect no payment was made and the account was never taken out of delinquent status. The difference in time seems to make a difference if it was in or out of SOL. I looked on the internet and couldn't find any references to help me determine if the NSF payment restarts the SOL date? Anyone have any input on that?

My wife had a judgment on a Providian CC debt from a while back that she didn't respond to. We have just received a notice that her wages are being garnished. I have been doing research and it seems that not responding was the worst thing to have done. Unifund has added on a lot of interest (the original Providian account was $590, now they are garnishing $2000). Do these people make deals for lump sum payments? It seems like they only paid $50 for this debt, so is it reasonable to offer the original balance in a lump sum, instead of spread out over three years? Thanks for any advice.

I am looking for a suggestion/referral to someone who can review a credit report and make suggestions as to what action to take on different things. My wife's credit report has some less than desirable (but unfortunately accurate) entries on it from before our marriage. I have researched on my own, and it seems that some entries are nearing the point where they will be outdated (7 years), others are a couple years away and what I am looking for is someone who can advise on what to leave alone, what to try to pay, etc. so that I don't accidentally make things worse. I have looked for counseling agencies, but what I have found seems to concentrate on repayment, and I am not sure that is the best bet for things that are about to become outdated entries. Can anyone offer any suggestions?