Jump to content

stickyfingers

Members
  • Posts

    4665
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. @centex - I appreciate where you're coming from and, I suppose, technically your point is well-taken - it's likely all "accurate." It's also fair to say she should have known she was signing up with a shady institution who makes their money doing shady things. All that is fair. But, yes, absolutely I'm looking to help her by any means available which means thinking outside the box (which, generally, is what the arb approach is IMO). As I said earlier, based on her reports, I can see that the story she told me holds - she got it, realized it probably was a bad card company and PIFed and (believed she'd) canceled it - only to have another annual fee hit months later (with zero activity) and quickly become an $800 balance. I understand and can appreciate the "Consumers need to be more educated/informed/diligent" POV but I'm also quite sympathetic to the power imbalances at play too and want to help (if I'm able). If predatory lenders can embrace questionable practices to make money, I'm ok finding potentially questionable (though I'd always stop well short of "illegal") approaches to remedy to situation. Just looking for some outside of the box ideas...
  2. Thanks so much WC - I was traveling for work for the last week or so, so my apologies for the delayed reply. I very much appreciate all you do for the CB community!
  3. ...but they're also reporting and my goal was to see if I can get both TLs removed. Is there a mechanism to remove the C1 TL after a (hopefully) successful arb with Midland?
  4. @legaleagle2012 - sorry for the bit of a delay (I was traveling for work), one last question before I try arb - I do file arb with both Midland and Credit One (separately) yes? Thanks again. I very much appreciate it!
  5. Thanks for the quick reply WC (have I mentioned you're a saint?)..! Just two quick questions (for now) given that they replied to the initial dispute by sending me a packet of paperwork without my name listed anywhere (as above, my wife is listed as the guarantor): 1. Assuming they provide me the same set of documents without my name anywhere, what's next? i.e. what's the lever to get them to actually follow the law..? 2. Is there any thoughtful thing I can do to prevent this from getting re-entered on my wife's CR (as she's the listed guarantor)..? You really are salt of the earth WC - thanks!!
  6. @legaleagle2012 - I think I'm ready to get on the arb train! In my (albeit limited thus far) research, I've a few questions: 1. It seems like the two main arbitration companies are AAA and JAMS - is there any particular value in choosing one over the other? 2. In terms of actually filing for arbitration, it appears I file directly with the selected arbitration group (JAMS or AAA) and they contact the other party (i.e. I'm not sending the arbitration request to the CA via mail or even directly myself) - correct? 3. I'm inclined to get this ball rolling sooner rather than later. Any reason to not file as expeditiously as possible? I'll be off to educate myself as much as possible regarding arbitration over the next couple weeks (I'm not solely relying on posters here on CB but I'm also happy to avail myself of the knowledge of those who are more familiar with the process) so are there any useful "Guides to Arbitration (for consumers)" out there..?
  7. So I'm down to my last baddie on my last report, two medical collections on my EQ. I followed @Why Chat's HIPAA letter program and, upon my initial dispute with the CRAs, EX and TU removed immediately. With EQ they verified and I received a reply from the CA (Pacific Credit Services). Before getting into the CA's response, for context, while all my prior credit issues are certainly of my own doing, these two items are almost certainly the result of terrible billing practices by our local medical cartel. I live in a smallish town (by California standards) and we have one large physicians group that has cornered the health care market here for decades. They're the GPs, who refer specialists who are also partners and send you to labs also owned by them and so on. Also, they're notable for having massive turnover in their office staff - many folks in town have had nightmare issues with billing and, in my case, both my wife and I have tremendous insurance and we never pay more than $20 out of pocket for just about anything - and we always make our $20 copay in office - any amounts beyond our copay are picked up by either her or my insurance. Back to their response, in reviewing the information sent by the CA, the following items jumped out to me: The both print summaries in their mailing clearly lists my wife as the guarantor (on both services for one of our children) and not me although the item is on my credit report not hers! My child who was seen was seen in mid-2019 but it appears the insurer flagged the physician's group for overbilling and there's a mid-2020 letter included indicating that the claim had been overpaid and that the physicians' group now owed the insurer monies. This, apparently, was being passed on to us (again my wife was listed as the guarantor) nearly a year after treatment. It's a fair bit of treatment information on the printouts they sent to me and, while my son was 17 at the time, he's now over 18 and I did not believe they could/should be sending me another adult's medical records...? In any event, I want to be clear about next steps. WhyChat's site indicates given my situation (CRA and CA both responded and the entry remains) that I should send the Medical Dispute Validation Letter - except the first sentence of that letter reads: I'm not particularly savvy as regards medical collections but is it not an "invalid response" to entries on my credit report to send me documents that indicate my wife as the guarantor of the services in question? If so, what's the appropriate next course of action? Finally, the sum of these two collections is ~$400 so I can pay it and/but - 1. I'd only PFD; 2. I legitimately should not have had any obligation for any of these amounts beyond my $20 office copay and I'm less than keen to make the cartel whole for their shoddy billing practices. TIA for any advice good folks of CB! Cheers!
  8. @legaleagle2012 I'm sure I can do some arb digging (and will) but, up front, given that it's not my account, if I were so inclined, would I be able to accompany my wife's friend in an arb hearing/call or is it limited to only the individual party and/or counsel (I'm not a lawyer - though I'm sure I wasn't fooling anyone in that regard)..? I might actually be inclined to pursue the arbitration route here on her behalf but I don't know if that's allowed in arbitration. You seem more experienced than most, can you bring a "second" to an arb hearing who is *not* a lawyer..?
  9. Sounds very much like my son's story - although he didn't have to open any secured cards as he was able to take advantage of Discover (and one or two other issuers) cards targeted to college students. Same deal otherwise, low limits but they graduated under a year and are now reasonable limits for a 19-year-old. Just wanted to add (for passers-by) that actual college students can likely get around having to open secured cards as part of their baby credit steps.
  10. ...just wanted to say, as someone who's doing the same (trying to help a friend of my wife's out with some issues that seem huge to her too) it's very kind of you to be such a good friend to your friend. It's certainly rewarding to help sort one's own credit but it's extra nice when you can help someone else who has no idea. You're a good friend!
  11. ...but should she approach Credit One (OC ) or MCM (CA) when hoping for the PFD? In my own personal experience, I've only dealt with CAs past SOL (but, again, she's not well-off but she could come up with $1,000 within a few weeks if a PFD was viable) and I've never personally negotiated a PFD (though I'm reading up a fair bit in my free time) so it's unclear if, with something this new, I should go to the OC or the CA for the PFD (and if I go to the CA, doesn't that mean she'd be left with the OC reporting for the full seven?)... Thanks for the CFPB tip! And yes, after hearing how she got into this (cancelling via phone) when I offered to take a look for her, the first step was ordering paper copies! CB raised me well.
  12. Same first question I asked "I hope you sent your cancellation in via mail and tracked..?" Of course the answer was "No. I did it over the phone..." 🤯 So I told her it was likely going to be a "he said she said" kinda thing and that Credit One is a known bottom feeder. In the event it's going to come to down to her not being able to prove she canceled is PFD to the OC her most expedient form of action? Or is it worth trying to pry apart some of the inconsistencies in the reporting between Credit One and MCM? 'Preciate the reply centex!
  13. Because I ran into this and was interested as well, for any passers-by, I wanted to link to the post where the OP noted: No reason to really update/bump this beyond this conclusion but I wanted to add it in case others find it via search as did I... Cheers.
  14. I'd mentioned in other posts but I was a CB regular for a long while but, having been back for a while now in '22, I've sorted the few issues I had and I'm in the "let things age for six months" period but, to combat boredom while I wait, I offered to take a look at the reports for a friend of my wife's (who is going through a divorce and wants to have her credit straightened out for when it's final) and, while the approach for most of her items are straightforward, there's an interesting one with Credit One (OC) and Midland Credit Management (CA) I thought I'd run past the hive mind... So she had a Credit One card which she was certain she paid in full and then closed. When I looked her (hard copy) report, I see a high balance of ~$650 in August of 2020 which gets PIF in April of 2021 and stays at $0 through November of 2021. She claims when she PIF'ed she followed up with a request to close the account. However, the account continues to report as open through July 2022 and, you guessed it, in December of 2021 it appears the card was hit with the new annual fee ($39) which somehow (late fees and the like one imagines) grows to $277 in June 2022. As of July 2022, the account status on the Credit One entry reads "Paid, Closed." She's certain the account had been PIF'ed and closed (it's unclear to me if she paid *another* $277 in June to clear the balance and late fees, I've asked my wife to reach out and confirm). The MCM entry has a "Date opened" of December 2021 which is odd because, on the Credit One line, her account shows as "current" in December 2021 (with the $39 balance) as well as January 2022 (with a $67 balance) with the first 30 day delinquency on the Credit One account reporting in February 2022. Lastly, the MCM entry lists $880 past due as of July 2022. In my own personal credit repair experience, I've never worked with something so recent to default so this is why I'm reaching out to my CB peeps. While I'm working to sort the best plan of attack, there are some oddities right? 1. How does MCM have a balance due of $880 when the OC has a "Paid, Closed" entry? (and she's entirely sure she PIFed - I'm not vouching for her, just relaying her statement to me) 2. She's even amenable to PIFing (again) the balance if the Credit One and MCM entries can be removed. She's angry as heck with Credit One but when I mentioned to her in passing that, this close to the delinquency, a PIF might be her best/only bet she said if it would go away, she'd "write those rat *Admin and our Terms of Service prohibit profanity*s one last check." But there might be enough inconsistencies in the reporting, she might not need to go down that road yes? 3. Going from a $39 annual fee to a $900 balance due in seven months seems nuts!! Holy greedy fees Batman!! In any event, I'd appreciate a second/third/fifth set of eyes and brains to opine what the best course forward would be (again, I've never really dealt with reporting items this new) TIA CB folks!
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines