Jump to content


Forum Leads
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Linx04

  • Rank
    CB Resident Spelling Bee Loser
  • Birthday 09/13/1978

Profile Information

  • Location
    Hiding in the land of do it yourself!
  • Interests
    Reading Case Law, Sprinklers, Owl watching and anything Owls, Gardening.

Recent Profile Visitors

1,128 profile views
  1. I said the same thing in my response. That the law and FTC said they you ”may” not that you “shall”. Big difference in those two words. I had to use that same argument in another case. And yes I’m in Federal. I never die in State.
  2. I never mentioned settlement in my post. Although usually they do settle in my previous dealings. However, that being said, I do not file suit unless I believe that I am correct in my interpretation and that I have gone through every avenue prior to litigation. In my abundance of research of case law, there is only (1) case that might be close to their argument. They don’t even cite any cases to back up their argument. Aside from the C.F.R. Rule which points to the postal inspector. Yet, every other government agency, and the CRA’s themselves all state to file an ID Theft Re
  3. This is a serious question, as I am in the middle of litigation with one of the CRA’s in federal court. I claim that the ID Theft Report on the FTC website is exactly that, an ID Theft Report. The FTC website states the same. And the CRA’s state on their own websites to go to idtheft.gov and fill out an ID Theft Report. Now the CRA is arguing that it’s NOT and ID Theft Report because I didn’t file a police report. And the law (as laid out in C.F.R. By the CFPB) states that a Report May be filed WITH. Criminal law enforcement agency. And they specifically list the U
  4. The way Marv explained it makes sense. I am 99% sure that he is correct!
  5. That is exactly what happened Marv. The first payment was due 45 days later. We didn’t ask for that, they just said “it’s due 45 days from now”. The CU actually sent them a check for about $600 more than we financed. That was 13 days ago. Of course Tidewater says that they haven’t received it yet.
  6. If you read the post, GAP was REQUIRED for financing. So yes, of course it was rolled into the loan. Otherwise, there would have been no loan according to the lender. Further, not everyone has a choice and must use a “third tier toilet” as you put it. Nevertheless, that third tier toilet was thrown to the curb 3 months later. And, notwithstanding, no other options were available to SO at said time. Which brings me full circle to my original post. Lastly, paying more than the “minimum due” would not have negated the fact that they still claim that MORE IS OWED tha
  7. Hi all. My SO and I are having an issue with Tidewater Finance. SO purchased a car on 4/28/18 and it was financed through Tidewater. We made the three payments that were due every month. Just recently SO refinanced the auto loan through her credit union at a MUCH MUCH better rate. Tidewater is saying that the payoff is $462.00 more than we financed! The three payments that we made were $489.00 each. And it is a simple interest loan. Plus she was required to get GAP for them to finance the loan. Ally won’t refund it until Tidewater says that they are pa
  8. I kept getting sued by an OC who was the lender for a car I was the co-signer on that got repoed years ago. They sued me THREE times and I fought them off each and every time. Finally in the mail one day I got a 1099 and three days later the trade-line was deleted from all my CR's
  9. I am proactive too. If they didn't send you an original notice then they goofed. I'd poke the bear too. But please make sure you read the FCRA Marv, you know I am like a case law / statute dictionary on these things in the 6th at least!
  10. Linx04


    Yes, I would DV them CMRRR
  11. I usually pick apart the trade line and dispute nearly everything I can on it. My letters to the CRA's when it comes to disputing can be very long and detailed. But then again I sue the CRA's yearly usually, so I always want a large paper trail.
  12. Linx04


    As others have said, that is not re-insertion. You will need to send a new letter to the new CA.
  13. I would dispute it with AFNI and send them a letter demanding validation and letting them know that you have never had such an account.
  14. Since you say Midland and Portfolio, I would assume they have purchased these accounts. Therefore, I would proceed with paying as little as possible if anything, and do not pay a dime unless they remove the trade-line.
  • Create New...

Important Information