Jump to content

BC1972

Members
  • Content Count

    32
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About BC1972

  • Birthday 07/22/1972

Profile Information

  • Location
    Oregon
  1. I am calling to cancel tomorrow (gotta brush up on my Norwegian, or Hindi.. not sure which I will get). I guess I get to use all of those swear words I have been saving for the "burn the bridge" moment that has been building with these guys. First they raise their rates and quit having discount offers, now this. I might as well go pay for a legitimate 3B report every month and look that over, why would anyone want to monitor only their TRU file when the advice clearly stated in their learning center is that you "must monitor all three reports to get an accurate view of your credit situation" I'm outta here! Let me know if there are any no-membership (aka Amex) guys out there. I had Chase monitoring, but the report was very confusing and seemed to have vital info buried or misplaced. But is it still allowing daily pulls?
  2. Sherman Acquisition LP (AKA LVNV) has a crack in their armor. I am gathering evidence for a court case against them and I thought I would share this with you guys. http://www.manta.com/coms2/dnbcompany_f16y4t Check out this link.. $170K annual income (via D& thats a far stretch from the millions they claim on their web site! and WHO IS LEWIS BALL? I am looking into it.
  3. This letter is going out thursday so it mixes with their monday mail! Let me know if it needs any tweaking: Oh and PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE, if you are dealing with them, dont screw me up by sending them this same letter for your situation (then I look like I may have cut and pasted it), please make it your own by re-wording it. I am providing this as motivation, not cut-and-paste. LVNV FUNDING, LLC PO Box 10584 Greenville SC 29603-0584 April 29, 2008 Account numbers as they appear on my credit report supplied by TransUnion.com: TransUnionExperian Equifax **** **** **** LVNV Funding, LLC: This communication is your final notice to cease all damaging activities and address the situation which I have called to your attention. Failure to do so can make you liable for damages as well as penalties due as per the provisions of the FDCPA. I will only accept a response on LVNV letterhead, no other party is considered valid in light of the seriousness of this situation. The table below is an excerpt from my TransUnion credit report : Reported By: TransUnion Reported On: 04/23/2008 Account Number: **** Amount Delinquent: 3720 Payment Status/Method of Payment: Collection/Chargeoff Creditor's Name: LVNV FUNDING LLC Address: P.O. B 10584 GREENVILLE, SC 29603 REMARKS: Account information disputed by consumer, meets FCRA requirements In the table above, the statement which LVNV has entered into my consumer credit report, “Account information disputed by consumer, meets FCRA requirementsâ€, It is assumed that LVNV is in fact receiving communications regarding the validity of this alleged debt. Therefore all “Sherman Family†companies will be treated as if they were the same entity for the purpose of consolidating communication and making efficient use of a single point of contact. My policy is and has been to communicate with LVNV, LLC directly since LVNV, LLC claims I am liable for a debt which LVNV, LLC has not validated. The single point of contact from me will be through LVNV Funding, LLC since this company is the one reporting information to the credit bureaus and this causing damages of which I claim. All legal actions and motions for discovery will also be filed against LVNV Funding, LLC for the purpose of consolidating my actions onto the party responsible for the harm and damage under determination. Case law provides that LVNV and the “Sherman Family†are in fact debt collectors as defined in §1692a(4) and §1692a(6) of the FDCPA because the debts are already in default when they were assigned to the companies and are they are not the originators of the financial instruments. This requires LVNV or any agent thereof to validate the debt as required by FDCPA or remove their entries from the credit reporting system. Finally, in 15 U.S.C. §1692a(4) LVNV and the “Sherman Family†clearly fall into the assignee exception to the definition of a creditor which invalidates the claim of being a “factoring companyâ€. Now that it has been established that LVNV is in fact a debt collector: LVNV must comply with the FDCPA and remove their entries from my credit report within 3 days of receipt of this communication. Failure to respond to this communication, which has been typical, will not be tolerated. LVNV can be held liable under U.S.C. §1692e(8) for reporting inaccurate credit information which was known or should have been known to be false. I will pursue all avenues of recourse to rectify this situation and am prepared to defend myself from your damaging activities. Your immediate response is required in this matter. PO'd consumer
  4. Ok, CBNA is GONE. I sent DV#2 with extremely open but threatening language "I will have no choice but to correct your error for you through whatever legal, civil, or public avenues required by me or my council." This way the court is wide open and I am not threatening to sue, A little bit of their own game. Now for LVNV. They are getting a thick envelope filled with highlighted case law where they lost because the oposing party proved they were a DEBT COLLECTOR and therefore required to validate. I have also noticed that judges tend not to believe the bull that they do not have to respond when adressed directly through Resurgent. Last but not least, LVNV has to either provide documentation to Resurgent who then forwards it to you, or remove the entry. This is the way validation works. So if Resurgent can't validate, it also means LVNV can't. It is the burden of LVNV to prove otherwise. Wish me luck! I have removed almost every CA from my report. The 2 remaining: LVNV - all three CRA and Portfolio Recovery - Paid and reporting on Equifax (I plan on using the psycho method)
  5. Ok, here's the update on what has been happening with my credit "repair" On Feb 2, 2008 I started the process of repairing my credit. I disputed with the CRA and CA (1-2 Punch) for: Bay Area Collections LVNV CBNA Portfolio Recovery (Paid but still annoying) Pallisades Scores hovering around 547. After the dust settles on April 12, 2008: Bay Area Collections *DELETED* LVNV *STUCK LIKE GLUE, NO VALIDATION* CBNA *STUCK LIKE GLUE, sent detailed account info, but no statements etc* Portfolio Recovery (Paid but still annoying) *UPDATED as late 120 days STILL WRONG!* Pallisades *DELETED* So here are my questions: LVNV; Sherman Aquisitions responded to LVNV validation letter with an anemic letter that stated my name and account number. I sent another letter stating this wasn't validation and they had to remove their line. Weltman Weinberg and Reis ATTY sent a dunning notice representing their "client" LVNV. I immediately DV'd that. (Still in progress) LVNV has not provided any informationon their own letterhead. No form of validation has been sent. It has been 2 months since the process began. BTW it's a Providian account which I have been told by multiple people is SOL after 3 years regardless of where you are at. (Its been 4 years) NOW WHAT? CBNA; Sent DV No response for a LONG time, but credit report updated. Got letter April 17th with detailed info about account and stated they "forwarded" it to attorney Brad Rephen. Does this mean tehy have to remove their entry since it is now at another debt collectors office? CBNA was reporting beyond the thirty days after I sent DV letter even though they "semi-validated" 2 months later. NOW WHAT? I need some sound advice here. I may be ready to spring an attorney on these guys, but I dont want to waste time/money until I have enough evidence to make my move. BTW LVNV is STILL reporting false info.
  6. I just got two inquiries on my credit report on the same day by these guys and my score dropped 14 points! What do these guys do usually? I have LVNV, Providian, and Cap one on my reports
  7. Ok, it has been 30 days since I for my deletion notice from Bay Area, and it is STILL on my credit report!!! Any suggestions? I sent a copy of the letter to the CRA on 2-16 and they said they couldn't accept that as proof.
  8. There is a huge thread on this board about it and they finally came up with some "facts" about factoring. Basically a REAL factoring company buys account receivables (invoices that are due) from companies so that the companies can get guaranteed revenue before the bills would normally be paid. The idea originally is that the bills would be paid in a normal manner. The misuse of the "factoring company" designation is so that the OC, CA, and Factoring company can be on your report causing three poisonous trade lines on your report. OC xfers debt to CA who claims they are a factoring company (LVNV for example) then they use a legit CA to collect the balance of the "debt' you supposedly own LVNV. I have CBNA collecting on an account "owned" by LVNV, which is an OC of Providian. Three toxic tradelines for one debt. Evil in it's purest form and I wish they could all get jail time for it. I do have one question myself though, If LVNV claims to own the debt, cab Providian also have a TL or should they have to remove it since they have NO claims to the original debt in that case?
  9. Ok, here's something I have noticed about the CRA. They only comprehend about 50% of what you write in a letter over 2 sentences long. I sent a detailed and very direct letter stating my accurate identification information and employment information along with detailed address information complete with copies of leases, pay studs, bills, etc and they STILL got most of the information wrong when the CRA updated! They are complete salamanders. I am going to have to send a correction to correct my correction! The thing I have gleaned from this is as follows: If you want to trick them, bury your very specific request in an overwhelming pile of documentation and on the second or third page of a LONG letter written in 8, 7 or 6 pt type. Make it small so their OLD 15" CRT monitors won't display the scans very well. (I got an imp to complain at TransUnion on the phone about how crappy his monitor was and he was having trouble telling if something was a 6 or an 8 on one of my "super-rants" that I shrunk to fit on one side of a page. Then the clock may run out on your request because they don't notice it and you can get them that way, by saying you requested it but they ignored you. If you actually want them to pay attention, make ONE specific request addressing ONE specific aspect (such as address history) and put it on one single sided page stapled to the top of your backup documentation. They also seem to always nail me with "enclose a photocopy of your SSAN card" but they haven’t denied me anything because I didn't. I have been getting better results by only addressing one TL or CRA field at a time per letter. I have also been doing something I call "echoing" where you start the attack from two sources, I.E. dispute the EXACT same thing online the same day the letter shows as delivered, then if you can hit them on the phone, do it there as well. Also if you get a deletion letter from a CA send it to the CRA immediately so that they have a copy in their computers and it will expedite deletion in the future should it pop up again. Anyway, I hope this helps. I am trying to learn where the leverage is, and I definitely see cracks in their armor in the time-per-request area. I have also thought of writing the time sensitive communications in strangely, but understandably worded English with short specific sentences that make you not want to read it all the way through. Maybe repeat yourself frequently and never abbreviate. I have been studying a thing called NLP for about a year now that uses patterns in language to make your ideas either compatible or incompatible with people’s belief system. Google Neuro Linguistic Programming if you want to learn more. It has gotten me very far not only in the business I am in, but in my dealings with CA and CRA.
  10. How does that go? "The quickest way to lose your rights is not to use them?" All American citizens are entitled to basic rights such as not being assaulted(touched or restrained) by others, defamed (accused of stealing in public), or harrassed (bringing up an issue which has been resolved previously). I see no problem with a citizen armed with their rights going into a Wally world or a Costco with every intention of remaining an American the entire time. If they have a security problem they need to check the receipt at the register and not the door. I once cancelled my entire companies Costco memberships over a $9 pack of underwear because the cashier didnt give me my reciept then went to lunch. They would not let me leave the store, so I went over to the customer service desk and told them to throw the pack of underwear in the trash and refund all $1200 of my companies memberships, then the next day I gave the money to my employees and told them in a brief letter essentially I could no longer fund the Gestapo and suggested they could get their own memberships but I would have nothing to do with it. Needless to say the manager was called over and appologized for the situation, and let me keep the underwear, but since he could not guarantee this wouldn't happen to any of my employees I told him it was up to them to repurchase their memberships at full price after reading the letter enclosed with the check. Their security problem is not my problem and should never be. Retail theft laws are clear. A certified individual must witness you concealing the object and have reasonable belief that you intend to leave. They may only stop you for questioning once you clear the boundary that demarks the payment area. aka registers. To make it prosecutable, you must show intent by actually passing through an exit, but once you make it to a boundary i.e street they can't chase you and must call the police. Any variance to this on their part can result in HUGE fines for them. Physical restraint can only be used by people with power to arrest which is a very limit number of security personnell, and virtually zero retail employees. If a side arm is displayed by the security person and you have not committed a felony, we get into a whole new area. Let's just say Wal-Mart is playing with fire. I have seen awards as large as $45000 for simply locking a mother's 17 year old up in a room because he couldn't prove the Nintendo GameBoy he brought in to keep from getting bored was bought a week ago by his mom. Those same security persons also lifted the teenager off the ground to take him to the office and one ended up with kidnapping charges. Mom used the $34000 to fund the kids college. Bad thing is the experience negatively affected the guy and he turned into a bad boy and ended up using drugs and got his girlfriend pregnant. I knew this family and am certain the guy would not have gone the bad-boy route if he hadn't been disenchanted by cops interrrogating him for 1/2 hour and locking him in a freezing room because they didnt believe his mother was in the store shopping. It took his mom reporting him missing and having him paged 4 times before it sunk in he wasnt lying. All the while officer Bob is calling the his mom's home phone... Ring... Ring... She's not home guess it's off to juvi... His mom gave me the task of trying to get him not to hate cops... Let me tell you, it can't be done once something like that happens. My suggestion. Know your rights because NO ONE is looking out for you.
  11. The least you can do is figure out among all the lies which one is ACTUALLY contracted to collect currently, then attack the other two using 1-2 punch for sure and then send the CMRRR info to the CRA and demand a delete. Then focus like a laser on the remaining one plus OC. If you are out of SOL you are in absolutely no danger of becoming lliable for the debt by using standard DV (just don't ever make payments or admit it is yours always pay in lump sum in responde to agreement in terminal PFD letter). Just NEVER send them money without an agreement that specifically states that there is no further obligation, and they will delete completely. There is a ton of info on arranging PFD. The dispute method in this thread works in theory and is being tested at the moment, and so far the results look better than vanilla (not mine) disputing. I am looking forward to the results of my recent try using it. I am trying a little spin on it by breaking the dispute to the CRA up into one letter per TL so that there is alot of paper flying back and forth. The more work for them the better and distributed among more people takes more resources. The idea is to bleed their precious resources and become too expensive mentally and economically for them to deal with you. The CRA and CAs all operate on labor budgets that can easily be upset by complications. I recommend exploiting them when you can. I think we should have national dispute week and every american should take a sunday to review their credit report then send out those disputes the following monday. The letters would arrive by the truckload that friday and imagine the sight! Good luck!
  12. I just have to get this out of the way first. Please do not type in all capitals, it makes it difficult to read and implies you are shouting. People would rather see all small letters. It's easier on the eyes. With that out of the way... Here's my advice: You can't DV an OC or they will just laugh at you or send you a letter essentially calling you silly. What you need to do IF you want to know the information, is write them a nice letter explaining how you are investigating this account because you are uncertain about the information being reported. Make it real vague, don't admit it is yours, maybe mention there "might" be something "fraudulent" somewhere, but don't blame them or the CRA. I like to make it read as if the fraud could be their reporting, or it could be someone stole your ID but be very vague as to how or what the "fraud" is. But be careful not to get an involuntary fraud freeze put on your account. If the debt is within the SOL back away and leave it alone for as long as you can. (at least until it is out of SOL) ALSO under NO circumstances send a LIE written down on a sheet of paper that can be easily proven false. I have worked with lawyers and I have seen this used as if it were gasoline on a defendant that was metaphorically on fire. Judges HATE lies. Just had to get that upfront, just because the CA lies doesnt mean you have to. A little misunderstanding, or vagueness goes a long way and actually the more you get them to clarify to you "the one playing stupid" the more of a chance you can get information that will cause them to incriminate themselves. I highly suggest you read read read this site. Write down words you dont understand and punch them into the search tool at the top of the page (dont forget to uncheck the "Search this topic only" box. Dont just dive into credit repair or you will get the same results as if you dove into rebuilding a car engine with no experience. Expensive and messed up beyond repair. You might even get yourself sued and lose. I know you are anxious to repair your credit, but if you start out wrong it messes up your chances of getting a "hole in one" later which simply put means you sent a DV and it gets deleted. Don't cut and paste the letters from this or any other site. LEARN what the letter is saying then write it in your own wording and suited to your context. If the CA or CRA senses any cookie cutter or mismatched info they will immediately acuse you of using "credit repair kits" and quit taking you seriously. If you end up in court it also looks better if you know about what you were writing to them. There's nothing more embarassing than a judge asking you to elaborate on a letter and the only thing you know is that it is a validation letter and nothing else. I hope this helps, and I appologize to Jack1212 for hijacking his topic to explain "newbie" stuff. BTW congrats Jack on deleting LVNV. If fireballs rain from the heavens I want them to land on each of their offices so I can die knowing they got it first.
  13. WOOHOO I got a NOTICE OF DELETION from Bay are credit services! They are GONE with just the DV/CRA dispute on step one! I am watching my CR closely to watch it disappear. I think I will snail mail a copy of the notice of deletion to all thre CRAs just to make sure it is really clear because TRANSUNION just got through VERIFYING this account! HA!
  14. If I am reading this correctly, it says that Oregon will honor the SOL for the state of NH provided it is specified in the written contract. Anyone with experience interpreting law, feel free to chime in. I included the referenced statures as well so that the "full picutre" can be seen. The conflict of laws ORS 81.105 primarily concerns if I was an Organian when I signed the contract, I was not. I think I am safe from Providian aka LVNV's paws. 12.410 Definitions for ORS 12.410 to 12.480. As used in ORS 12.410 to 12.480: (1) “Claim†means a right of action that may be asserted in a civil action or proceeding and includes a right of action created by statute. (2) “State†means a state, commonwealth, territory or possession of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, a foreign country or a political subdivision of any of them. [1987 c.536 §1] Note: 12.410 to 12.480 were enacted into law by the Legislative Assembly but were not added to or made a part of ORS chapter 12 or any series therein by legislative action. See Preface to Oregon Revised Statutes for further explanation. 12.420 Purpose. ORS 12.410 to 12.480 shall be applied and construed to effectuate its general purpose to make uniform the law with respect to the subject of ORS 12.410 to 12.480 among states enacting it. [1987 c.536 §6] Note: See note under 12.410. 12.430 Claims based on law of other states; limitation period. (1) Except as provided by ORS 12.450, if a claim is substantively based: [a] Upon the law of one other state, the limitation period of that state applies; or Upon the law of more than one state, the limitation period of one of those states, chosen by the law of conflict of laws of this state, applies. [2] The limitation period of this state applies to all other claims. [1987 c.536 §2] Note: See note under 12.410. 12.440 Application of statutes and rules governing conflict of laws. If the statute of limitations of another state applies to the assertion of a claim in this state, the other state’s relevant statutes and other rules of law governing tolling and accrual apply in computing the limitation period, but its statutes and other rules of law governing conflict of laws do not apply. [1987 c.536 §3] Note: See note under 12.410. 12.450 When limitation period of another state not applicable. If the court determines that the limitation period of another state applicable under ORS 12.430 and 12.440 is substantially different from the limitation period of this state and has not afforded a fair opportunity to sue upon, or imposes an unfair burden in defending against the claim, the limitation period of this state applies. [1987 c.536 §4] Note: See note under 12.410.
  15. I just sent out a dispute CMRRR to all 3 disputing the horrifically inacurate information habitually reported by LVNV. I will let you know how it goes. I am going to do CBNA next. I think I may need to do one TL at a time because of the "similar" dispute problem the CRAs have, and I am wondering if I shouldn't just provide 2 or three reasons per TL per try so that they can't claim redundancy. QUESTION: Can this work with OC TL? and how do you get them to send you copies of cardmember agreements, statements etc? I found out that Providian has an SOL of 3 years regardless of your location, so I may start hounding them until they try to take me to court, then wave the cardmember agreement around in court which says they limit their venue to New Hampshire. I will just put it in with all the other "evidence" during the discovery phase, then pull it out after they get their rant in about how I never paid them back, fees, attorneys, etc, may be let it go on for a bit.. then just state real dryly, "If your venue is New Hampshire which has an SOL of 3 years, why are you wasting this judges time? I move for dismissal." Of course I should set it up with a nice countersuit that makes them pay for all the postage for CMRRR, credit monitoring, and finally demand they remove all record of the debt including the CA records. Sound fun?

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

Guidelines