Jump to content

Please consider disabling your adblocker for CreditBoards if you have not already done so.  This site depends on advertising revenue to stay online.


  • Content Count

  • Joined

Recent Profile Visitors

550 profile views
  1. Considering Portfolio is a JDB, verifying an obsolete account would also be an FDCPA violation along with possible state consumer law violations.
  2. Was the account opened in 2008 or charged off in 2008?
  3. Portfolio didn’t have to validate. Credit reporting is not an initial communication that triggers a consumer’s right to validation.
  4. You’re referring to 47 USC § 415. It could depend on where a consumer is located. The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the federal statute does not preempt state statutes of limitations for that type of debt. We conclude that § 415(a) does not apply to the plaintiffs' debts, because Congress has not made clear that it intended for § 415(a) to preempt state statutes of limitations with respect to actions to collect debts like those at issue here. "[T]he purpose of Congress is the ultimate touchstone in every pre-emption case." Castro v. Collecto Inc., 634 F.3d 779, 785 (5th Cir. 2011). Congress has not indicated a "clear and manifest purpose," for § 415(a) to preempt state statutes of limitations governing actions under state law to recover non-tariffed charges. Id at 787.
  5. I know that, but those consent orders apply only to those particular debt buyers and no others. The prohibition to reselling accounts comes from the CFPB and is not based on a state or federal law that generally prohibits resales of accounts. Consumers and courts cannot enforce it. A demand from a consumer has no power at all to enforce the prohibition.
  6. Yeah. It’s a shame those letters are still available. I’ll always wonder if the composers of those letters really believed that consumers could demand that JDBs not sell or report accounts and that those demands, along with claims of fraud and extortion, would hold up in court.
  7. I don’t know where that part came from, but it’s not true. Unless the debt has been paid, a JDB can resell it. If it is within the 7-year reporting period, as long as a JDB owns an account and reports accurately, it can report it. For it to do so is not fraud, extortion, or a violation of the FDCPA.
  8. He should get it in writing that when the agreed upon amount is paid, the judgment is satisfied, and a satisfaction of judgment will be filed with the court. When the satisfaction of judgment is filed, the lien will be released.
  9. They could sue, but if you raise the statute of limitations as an affirmative defense, they would not be successful. In addition, you’d have a violation of the FDCPA for filing suit on a time-barred debt.
  10. Actually, they were required to send you any documentation. Finding an entry on a credit report is not an initial communication that triggers a consumer’s right to demand validation under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. In addition, the Fair Credit Reporting Act does not require documentation be sent to a consumer in response to a dispute.
  11. @CreditSucksNot @BrokeBob Not every court has ruled that a debt collector must inform consumers of the time-barred status of a debt. Here is a ruling from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Woodward v. Collection Consultants of California (9th Circuit, 2020) “Here, CCOC's letter provides an offer to ‘resolve’ Woodward's past-due accounts without mentioning that the statute of limitations has expired, but it is not misleading or deceptive in any way, and it complies with all legal requirements.” It could all depend upon the language in the letter. From Buchanan v. Northland Group, (6th Circuit Court of Appeals, 2015): ”When a [collection] letter creates confusion about a creditor's right to sue, that is illegal.” The 6th Circuit didn’t like the word “settlement” because that word implies that a debt is enforceable in court. Notice that the letter in the 9th Circuit ruling used the word “resolve”. We don’t know where the OP is located or what was written in the letter.
  12. In addition to the advice given by @centex, you can send validation letters, and the debt collectors might respond. However, unless the requests are being sent within 30 days of the initial communications, the collection agencies are not required to respond and can still report.
  13. Unless you have a specific dispute, why not just “cease and desist all communications”? That serves the purpose. Anything else is a waste. You don’t to need inform them about the SOL. They already told you it’s time-barred. They are allowed to sell the account if they choose to do so. Telling them not to won’t stop them.
  14. How does disputing a debt say “this is my debt, and I’m willing to pay”?

About Us

Since 2003, creditboards.com has helped thousands of people repair their credit, force abusive collection agents to follow the law, ensure proper reporting by credit reporting agencies, and provided financial education to help avoid the pitfalls that can lead to negative tradelines.
  • Create New...

Important Information