Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
KYBOSH

Does WhyChat's SOL letter REALLY work?

Recommended Posts

Whychat has a letter NOTICE TO COLLECTION AGENCY LAWS RULES AND CODES RE:SOL which says that a bill collector cannot continue collection activities on a debt that is past SOL. Reporting the debt to the credit bureau is considered collection activity.

He has a letter on his page which we send the CA then one that we send the CRA informing them that the account should be deleted because its past SOL. Makes sense but with so many ppl with debts on their CR that are way past SOL does it or has it ever worked?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whychat has a letter NOTICE TO COLLECTION AGENCY LAWS RULES AND CODES RE:SOL which says that a bill collector cannot continue collection activities on a debt that is past SOL. Reporting the debt to the credit bureau is considered collection activity.

He has a letter on his page which we send the CA then one that we send the CRA informing them that the account should be deleted because its past SOL. Makes sense but with so many ppl with debts on their CR that are way past SOL does it or has it ever worked?

 

 

Yes - it does really work. I JUST sent my 'version' (you do need to make it your own in some capacity) to a CA who was trying to collect on an 18 year old debt (obviously well past the SOL...). I was getting a CA call per day. The calls AND the letters have STOPPED. I just got my lil' green card back yesterday as well.

 

I sent the letter to prevent them from adding the collection to my credit report. Luckily for me, it wasn't slapped on there first!

 

WhyChat gives fantastic advice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But what if the debt is past SOL and already on your report? Why shouldn't it be removed after the SOL has passed? Since reporting is considered collection activity and they aren't supposed to engage in collection activity of a debt that is past SOL....

Edited by KYBOSH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But what if the debt is past SOL and already on your report? Why shouldn't it be removed after the SOL has passed? Since reporting is considered collection activity and they aren't supposed to engage in collection activity of a debt that is past SOL....

From what I have read, they are allowed to try and collect for longer than the SOL, they just are not allowed to sue you over it after the SOL...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is taken from WhyChat's SOL letter:

 

 

Under the laws of my State,(statute # if available) continued collection activities, including reporting,verification or reinsertion of accounts. beyond their legal collection date to any consumer credit reporting agency, may be considered extortion and/or fraud and subject to criminal as well as civil prosecution.

 

So which state might it be an offense to report after the SOL is up?

 

I may be moving !

Edited by KYBOSH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My understanding:

 

They can report the debt for the 7 year term. This is governed by the federal laws and affects all states.

They can sue you for the length of the SOL. This is based on state law and varies based on the state.

 

They can try and collect from you for as long as they want, but without threats of a lawsuit and no ability to impact you (because they cant report it), theres little chance they'll get paid, so why waste the time and effort?

Edited by wavelengthsf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Truth be told...I should be sending whychat a big-fat check. I've used two of his letters, 1 to DV a ca

and it worked like a charm. Whatchat is an extremley reliable source!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The first step is to send the "pre" dispute letter to the CRA,here is a version of it:

 

dispute as follows:

 

Dear CRA

My Name is xxxx

My SS # is xxx xx xxxx

I am sending this dispute certified mail # xxx to make sure you receive it.

 

On my credit report # xxxxx the following account(s) is/are inaccurate

Account # xxxxx

 

I have no record of this/these account(s) from this/these creditor(s)

for this/these dates for this/these amount(s)

 

Any accounts I may have had in the past with any similar creditor(s)

would have had a date of last activity over 7 years ago and would be

obsolete.

 

If this/these account(s) is/are verified, please furnish me with the

name and address of the verifying party,the method of verification, and

the reported first delinquency from the original creditor.

 

Sincerely,

 

Make sure you use personalized stationery,and if you are doing it on

your computer ( hand written is best)use purple or teal italic font.

HAND ADDRESS the envelope and send it certified, but NOT RR.

 

This will get rid of MOST of your older accounts that are past the legal SOL for your State but are NOT yet over the 7 year reporting period.

 

If they are FULLY verified, with the DOFD as requested, you can then send them the SOL letter and follow up with the 2nd dispute letter.

 

I do not wish to go into another lengthy discussion of why this works, if you search you will find a BIG LONG thread on it with MUCH discussion of the legal basis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The first step is to send the "pre" dispute letter to the CRA,here is a version of it:

 

dispute as follows:

 

Dear CRA

My Name is xxxx

My SS # is xxx xx xxxx

I am sending this dispute certified mail # xxx to make sure you receive it.

 

On my credit report # xxxxx the following account(s) is/are inaccurate

Account # xxxxx

 

I have no record of this/these account(s) from this/these creditor(s)

for this/these dates for this/these amount(s)

 

Any accounts I may have had in the past with any similar creditor(s)

would have had a date of last activity over 7 years ago and would be

obsolete.

 

If this/these account(s) is/are verified, please furnish me with the

name and address of the verifying party,the method of verification, and

the reported first delinquency from the original creditor.

 

Sincerely,

 

Make sure you use personalized stationery,and if you are doing it on

your computer ( hand written is best)use purple or teal italic font.

HAND ADDRESS the envelope and send it certified, but NOT RR.

 

This will get rid of MOST of your older accounts that are past the legal SOL for your State but are NOT yet over the 7 year reporting period.

 

If they are FULLY verified, with the DOFD as requested, you can then send them the SOL letter and follow up with the 2nd dispute letter.

 

I do not wish to go into another lengthy discussion of why this works, if you search you will find a BIG LONG thread on it with MUCH discussion of the legal basis.

 

 

WhyChat....just curious...do you know if that would work on old Student Loans that are no longer reporting due to being sold/transferred?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WhyChat, the letter you posted above speaks only of accounts that "had a date of last activity over 7 years ago and would be obsolete." It makes no mention of my state's SOL (which is 4 years by the way) or why they should know to delete it.

 

I know you don't want to go into how this works again and I will do a search later on tonight on that long thread you are talking about, but if what you are saying is true....

then the mailroom reps reading the letter will look at where the person resides and know that the SOL in his state is X years and delete most of the accounts that are past SOL accordingly.

If that is true then the residents of SC should have the cleanest reports bcos their SOL is only 3 years.

If that ever happened then half the war would be won!

I personally have never had anything remotely like that happen to me. All I know is that if the CA or OC verifies then it stays.

 

And what is the difference between the pre-dispute and a regular dispute? They both say the account isn't mine and I would like it to be deleted. Yours even has a procedural request included.

 

Thanks Champ!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WhyChat, the letter you posted above speaks only of accounts that "had a date of last activity over 7 years ago and would be obsolete." It makes no mention of my state's SOL (which is 4 years by the way) or why they should know to delete it.

 

I know you don't want to go into how this works again and I will do a search later on tonight on that long thread you are talking about, but if what you are saying is true....

then the mailroom reps reading the letter will look at where the person resides and know that the SOL in his state is X years and delete most of the accounts that are past SOL accordingly. NO, they read the dispute of the account being OBSOLETE- over 7 years old, and start a verification investigation requesting the CA provide the DOFD in rebuttal to the obsolete claim

If that is true then the residents of SC should have the cleanest reports bcos their SOL is only 3 years.

If that ever happened then half the war would be won!

I personally have never had anything remotely like that happen to me. All I know is that if the CA or OC verifies then it stays.

 

And what is the difference between the pre-dispute and a regular dispute? They both say the account isn't mine and I would like it to be deleted. Yours even has a procedural request included.I don't see anywhere in any of my letters that claim the account is "not mine" I reserve THAT dispute for ID theft cases

 

Thanks Champ!

I don't know how to answer your questions as they seem to have NOTHING to do with the VERY clear explanations of the procedures, together with the background and caselaw links that I have posted.

 

Try it, you'll like it!! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of why chat's letters have worked for me. SOL, medical, etc. Cleared both my own as well as dh's reports completely using the samples on whychat's site. Took me about 4-6 to get the job completely done, but they surely did work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WhyChat, the letter you posted above speaks only of accounts that "had a date of last activity over 7 years ago and would be obsolete." It makes no mention of my state's SOL (which is 4 years by the way) or why they should know to delete it.

 

I know you don't want to go into how this works again and I will do a search later on tonight on that long thread you are talking about, but if what you are saying is true....

then the mailroom reps reading the letter will look at where the person resides and know that the SOL in his state is X years and delete most of the accounts that are past SOL accordingly. NO, they read the dispute of the account being OBSOLETE- over 7 years old, and start a verification investigation requesting the CA provide the DOFD in rebuttal to the obsolete claim

If that is true then the residents of SC should have the cleanest reports bcos their SOL is only 3 years.

If that ever happened then half the war would be won!

I personally have never had anything remotely like that happen to me. All I know is that if the CA or OC verifies then it stays.

 

And what is the difference between the pre-dispute and a regular dispute? They both say the account isn't mine and I would like it to be deleted. Yours even has a procedural request included.I don't see anywhere in any of my letters that claim the account is "not mine" I reserve THAT dispute for ID theft cases

 

Thanks Champ!

I don't know how to answer your questions as they seem to have NOTHING to do with the VERY clear explanations of the procedures, together with the background and caselaw links that I have posted.

 

Try it, you'll like it!! :angel:

7 years, yes, that's the SOL for reporting, so it makes sense that these should come off.

 

I think OP question (and some others as well as mine) is whether this works on debts between the legal SOL and reporting SOL.

 

I live in AZ, for example, and legal SOL on open contracts is 3 years. Say I have an account with a DOFD in 2003. They can't make a suit stick, but I still have 4 more years before the reporting SOL expires. Is your SOL letter intended to work to get a deletion in this scenario?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 years, yes, that's the SOL for reporting, so it makes sense that these should come off.

 

I think OP question (and some others as well as mine) is whether this works on debts between the legal SOL and reporting SOL.

 

I live in AZ, for example, and legal SOL on open contracts is 3 years. Say I have an account with a DOFD in 2003. They can't make a suit stick, but I still have 4 more years before the reporting SOL expires. Is your SOL letter intended to work to get a deletion in this scenario?

Yes,

 

The key to most of my letters is to find a "loophole" or "catch22" in the various rules and use them to the advantage of the consumer.

 

If you dispute an account as "obsolete" there is an obligation on the part of the CRA to investigate and get either a CORRECT DOFD from the CA,which then gives you a verified and updated entry, or NO response, which gives you a deletion.

 

If you get a verified DOFD from the CA which is beyond the LEGAL SOL for your State, and still within the 7 year reporting SOL and send the CA the SOL letter, they are in a "catch22" situation. When you send the SECOND dispute letter, which again requires them to verify a DOFD which is beyond the legal SOL that you have sent them NOTICE of, they can NOT respond because they are subject to the FDCPA prohibition of implying a legal right to collect on an account they no longer have any legal rights on. ( The FTC has given an opinion that reporting is an implication of asserting a legal right to collect).

 

They can't respond without risking a violation of the FDCPA, they are on notice that they can't sue, they have been given a strict cease and desist which includes verifying or reporting and they can't sell it as a "collectible" account to another CA because of the notification in the SOL letter.

:rofl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
( The FTC has given an opinion that reporting is an implication of asserting a legal right to collect).

 

Wait. Why can they report paid accounts for 7 years then. After all, they are already paid, so the CA/CO cannot legally collect on them anymore?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 years, yes, that's the SOL for reporting, so it makes sense that these should come off.

 

I think OP question (and some others as well as mine) is whether this works on debts between the legal SOL and reporting SOL.

 

I live in AZ, for example, and legal SOL on open contracts is 3 years. Say I have an account with a DOFD in 2003. They can't make a suit stick, but I still have 4 more years before the reporting SOL expires. Is your SOL letter intended to work to get a deletion in this scenario?

Yes,

 

The key to most of my letters is to find a "loophole" or "catch22" in the various rules and use them to the advantage of the consumer.

 

If you dispute an account as "obsolete" there is an obligation on the part of the CRA to investigate and get either a CORRECT DOFD from the CA,which then gives you a verified and updated entry, or NO response, which gives you a deletion.

 

If you get a verified DOFD from the CA which is beyond the LEGAL SOL for your State, and still within the 7 year reporting SOL and send the CA the SOL letter, they are in a "catch22" situation. When you send the SECOND dispute letter, which again requires them to verify a DOFD which is beyond the legal SOL that you have sent them NOTICE of, they can NOT respond because they are subject to the FDCPA prohibition of implying a legal right to collect on an account they no longer have any legal rights on. ( The FTC has given an opinion that reporting is an implication of asserting a legal right to collect).

 

They can't respond without risking a violation of the FDCPA, they are on notice that they can't sue, they have been given a strict cease and desist which includes verifying or reporting and they can't sell it as a "collectible" account to another CA because of the notification in the SOL letter.

B)

 

Very well explained Whychat. That's exactly what I was looking for. That 'loophole' in between the 7 year reporting rule and the time after the SOL has run out.

Now if we could only get a CA to care that they were violating the law by verifying over and over again then we might be getting somewhere.

Edited by KYBOSH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 years, yes, that's the SOL for reporting, so it makes sense that these should come off.

 

I think OP question (and some others as well as mine) is whether this works on debts between the legal SOL and reporting SOL.

 

I live in AZ, for example, and legal SOL on open contracts is 3 years. Say I have an account with a DOFD in 2003. They can't make a suit stick, but I still have 4 more years before the reporting SOL expires. Is your SOL letter intended to work to get a deletion in this scenario?

Yes,

 

The key to most of my letters is to find a "loophole" or "catch22" in the various rules and use them to the advantage of the consumer.

 

If you dispute an account as "obsolete" there is an obligation on the part of the CRA to investigate and get either a CORRECT DOFD from the CA,which then gives you a verified and updated entry, or NO response, which gives you a deletion.

 

If you get a verified DOFD from the CA which is beyond the LEGAL SOL for your State, and still within the 7 year reporting SOL and send the CA the SOL letter, they are in a "catch22" situation. When you send the SECOND dispute letter, which again requires them to verify a DOFD which is beyond the legal SOL that you have sent them NOTICE of, they can NOT respond because they are subject to the FDCPA prohibition of implying a legal right to collect on an account they no longer have any legal rights on. ( The FTC has given an opinion that reporting is an implication of asserting a legal right to collect).

 

They can't respond without risking a violation of the FDCPA, they are on notice that they can't sue, they have been given a strict cease and desist which includes verifying or reporting and they can't sell it as a "collectible" account to another CA because of the notification in the SOL letter.

:)

This is the part I don't get. The "legal right to collect" extends until the (presumed valid) debt is paid. They may not be able to successfully sue after x years and the FCRA prohibits reporting past 7 years, but they can legally collect it until the debtor decides to pay it. What am I missing?

 

Mind you, I'm not arguing the success rate of the letter. I'm only trying to get clarification of the theory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to know how it works also.

 

So is this the same as the 1, 2 punch (on things over 4 years, but not 7 years) on debts in texas..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are time limits to the only real motivations to pay a debt. SOL and 7 year Credit report deadline.

There is nothing wrong with them sending you a bill 20 years down the line for a debt that you once had.

There is nothing wrong with them accepting payment if you sent them a check just bcos you felt bad.

The chances of them collecting anything after its off your report is nill. But they try because the cost of a stamp and a phone call is still inexpensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are time limits to the only real motivations to pay a debt. SOL and 7 year Credit report deadline.

There is nothing wrong with them sending you a bill 20 years down the line for a debt that you once had.

There is nothing wrong with them accepting payment if you sent them a check just bcos you felt bad.

The chances of them collecting anything after its off your report is nill. But they try because the cost of a stamp and a phone call is still inexpensive.

 

 

I get that, but I'm trying to understand why these letters would get it off before seven years simply becuase they can't sue you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The first step is to send the "pre" dispute letter to the CRA,here is a version of it:

 

dispute as follows:

 

Dear CRA

My Name is xxxx

My SS # is xxx xx xxxx

I am sending this dispute certified mail # xxx to make sure you receive it.

 

On my credit report # xxxxx the following account(s) is/are inaccurate

Account # xxxxx

 

I have no record of this/these account(s) from this/these creditor(s)

for this/these dates for this/these amount(s)

 

Any accounts I may have had in the past with any similar creditor(s)

would have had a date of last activity over 7 years ago and would be

obsolete.

 

If this/these account(s) is/are verified, please furnish me with the

name and address of the verifying party,the method of verification, and

the reported first delinquency from the original creditor.

 

Sincerely,

 

Make sure you use personalized stationery,and if you are doing it on

your computer ( hand written is best)use purple or teal italic font.

HAND ADDRESS the envelope and send it certified, but NOT RR.

 

This will get rid of MOST of your older accounts that are past the legal SOL for your State but are NOT yet over the 7 year reporting period.

 

If they are FULLY verified, with the DOFD as requested, you can then send them the SOL letter and follow up with the 2nd dispute letter.

 

I do not wish to go into another lengthy discussion of why this works, if you search you will find a BIG LONG thread on it with MUCH discussion of the legal basis.

 

 

 

So simply sending this letter will get the ones they can't sue you for off your credit report? How many people have luck with this? Seems like it would be great for the 4-7 year old accounts (texas - 4 years SOL for suing) What are people's thoughts, experience with this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  




  • Today's Birthdays

    No users celebrating today.
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      178,006
    • Most Online
      2,046

    Newest Member
    MartiH
    Joined

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