Jump to content

Re: Collection just hit Experian


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, StarkRaven$ said:

I found Credence Resource Management online and they are a collection agency. So the question is "after" you receive your paper reports and check exactly how this collection is reported, is if you should DV it and how exactly to do that. 

 

Any takers here to answer this question?

What state was this debt in? Also, when was the date of last delinquency? Is the CO still within the SOL?

Link to post
Share on other sites

@maverick9 I had a similar situation happen with an old comcast account that put on my credit reports last year by AFNI. I had never received a credit for my returned cable box and router from comcast when I moved and dropped them off at the UPS store. They sent the account to collections and I had no idea I owed anything. The collection dropped my score 76 points. It was reaged to appear like a recent account.

 

I checked with the original creditor comcast FIRST. I logged in to my two year old dormant account and sure enough the balance was showing there for the cable box. I paid it on the portal and printed a copy of my zero balance as a pdf.

 

I then went to the Illinois better business bureau and filed a complaint against AFNI stating that they were reaging a reporting a balance on an account that I owed nothing to the original creditor. AFNI is known to cave when you file bbb complaints. I attached the zero balance pdf from the comcast website as proof. 

 

AFNI responded to the bbb complaint within 24 hours and said they would remove the collection from all three reports. They did.

 

I think a LOT of collectors that collect for utilities work the same way. My suggestion would be to see if you can pay the balance owed with ATT and do not deal with the creditor until you have a zero balance. Then demand they stop collecting on the account and remove the incorrect collection from your reports because the collection WILL be incorrect. They have no reason or ability to collect on an account that has been paid in full with the original creditor.

Edited by lgt525
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lgt525 said:

@maverick9 I had a similar situation happen with an old comcast account that put on my credit reports last year by AFNI. I had never received a credit for my returned cable box and router from comcast when I moved and dropped them off at the UPS store. They sent the account to collections and I had no idea I owed anything. The collection dropped my score 76 points. It was reaged to appear like a recent account.

 

I checked with the original creditor comcast FIRST. I logged in to my two year old dormant account and sure enough the balance was showing there for the cable box. I paid it on the portal and printed a copy of my zero balance as a pdf.

 

I then went to the Illinois better business bureau and filed a complaint against AFNI stating that they were reaging a reporting a balance on an account that I owed nothing to the original creditor. AFNI is known to cave when you file bbb complaints. I attached the zero balance pdf from the comcast website as proof. 

 

AFNI responded to the bbb complaint within 24 hours and said they would remove the collection from all three reports. They did.

 

I think a LOT of collectors that collect for utilities work the same way. My suggestion would be to see if you can pay the balance owed with ATT and do not deal with the creditor until you have a zero balance. Then demand they stop collecting on the account and remove the incorrect collection from your reports because the collection WILL be incorrect. They have no reason or ability to collect on an account that has been paid in full with the original creditor.

Well see, you just never know. My research always said not to pay or it would reset the SOL and just report as a paid CO. For sure don't pay the collection agency.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, StarkRaven$ said:

Well see, you just never know. My research always said not to pay or it would reset the SOL and just report as a paid CO. For sure don't pay the collection agency.

@StarkRaven$ I paid the original creditor comast. I agree you should never pay the collection agency if possible. Pay for delete should be a last resort since many collection agencies don't honor their deals.

 

But paying the original creditor makes the debt invalid for the collection agency to report on. The zero balance is with the original creditor, so there is no collection, no changing balances on the collection info etc. They need to withdraw the reporting.

 

AFNI is particularly willing to do this if pressed via BBB. I think it's worth a try for other utility collectors as well like the one the OP is dealing with.

 

The key here is that the debt still needs to be owned by the original creditor. If a JDB has bought it, this won't work.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lgt525 said:

@StarkRaven$ I paid the original creditor comast. I agree you should never pay the collection agency if possible. Pay for delete should be a last resort since many collection agencies don't honor their deals.

 

But paying the original creditor makes the debt invalid for the collection agency to report on. The zero balance is with the original creditor, so there is no collection, no changing balances on the collection info etc. They need to withdraw the reporting.

 

AFNI is particularly willing to do this if pressed via BBB. I think it's worth a try for other utility collectors as well like the one the OP is dealing with.

 

The key here is that the debt still needs to be owned by the original creditor. If a JDB has bought it, this won't work.

Years ago I had a CO from Western Dental and they refused to delete the collection if I paid in full. They said they would report on the CR as a paid collection. They were shady in telling me the old 12-year old debt clearly beyond the SOL was reporting correctly. Long story but I don't want to cloud up this post and make it about me.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, StarkRaven$ said:

Well see, you just never know. My research always said not to pay or it would reset the SOL and just report as a paid CO. For sure don't pay the collection agency.

There are TWO limitations expiry windows to be aware of- the one for litigation (in which a payment COULD reset the window, but this is jurisdiction specific) and the one for reporting (which can NOT be reset by a payment that does not bring an account current).  Once an account has charged-off, it has charged-off- you aren't Rule 5000'ing that puppy back to the world of active accounts. 

 

Now, even though a reporting SOL may not be reset, the recent activity CAN have a detrimental impact IF the entity were reporting the payment.  However, when dealing with a third-party entity, the prudent consumer is negotiating a pay for delete agreement.  And where that has occurred, there IS no reporting to be concerned with insofar as the third party furnisher is concerned...

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, StarkRaven$ said:

Don't pay it for that may reset the SOL for credit reporting. That is my understanding. Wait for solid advice on tackling this.

Once an account is charged off, paying it will NOT reset the 7-year reporting period.  That time period is based upon the date of first delinquency that led to collection or charge-off.  A payment is not a delinquency.   Since a charged-off account cannot be brought back to a current status, it can never again be delinquent.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lgt525 said:

I think a LOT of collectors that collect for utilities work the same way. My suggestion would be to see if you can pay the balance owed with ATT and do not deal with the creditor until you have a zero balance. Then demand they stop collecting on the account and remove the incorrect collection from your reports because the collection WILL be incorrect. They have no reason or ability to collect on an account that has been paid in full with the original creditor.

 

I'm noting a modest nit with this information; but don't get me wrong ... this is a strong post (and I've ♥️'d it).

 

I trust you understand that the collection tradeline runs afoul of FCRA/FCDPA only if it continues to show a balance in collection.  And, when this is the case, there are two potential remedies:  removal of the inaccurate tradeline, or correction of the tradeline to report a PAID status.

 

I just want to make clear that just because you've paid the balance with the OC and demanded removal of the tradeline, you aren't necessarily entitled to that removal under FCRA/FDCPA.  (And, FWIW, I strongly believe when a collection account balance is paid directly to an OC, during a period when the account has been assigned to a CA, that the CA almost always will receive a cut of the payment under terms of the collection contract in place.)

 

Having said that, I heartily concur with your recommendation to settle with an OC, where possible, and to immediately dispute the collection tradeline with the CRA's.  I believe this maximizes the likelihood that the CA (who's fat and happy with the commission paid by the OC) may choose/neglect to respond to CRA's inquiry.  Just understand that if the CA updates their reporting of the CO to PAID, the CA and the CRA are within their rights to continue reporting until 7 yr 6 mo subsequent to the DOFD with the OC.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hdporter said:

 

I'm noting a modest nit with this information; but don't get me wrong ... this is a strong post (and I've ♥️'d it).

 

I trust you understand that the collection tradeline runs afoul of FCRA/FCDPA only if it continues to show a balance in collection.  And, when this is the case, there are two potential remedies:  removal of the inaccurate tradeline, or correction of the tradeline to report a PAID status.

 

I just want to make clear that just because you've paid the balance with the OC and demanded removal of the tradeline, you aren't necessarily entitled to that removal under FCRA/FDCPA.  (And, FWIW, I strongly believe when a collection account balance is paid directly to an OC, during a period when the account has been assigned to a CA, that the CA almost always will receive a cut of the payment under terms of the collection contract in place.)

 

Having said that, I heartily concur with your recommendation to settle with an OC, where possible, and to immediately dispute the collection tradeline with the CRA's.  I believe this maximizes the likelihood that the CA (who's fat and happy with the commission paid by the OC) may choose/neglect to respond to CRA's inquiry.  Just understand that if the CA updates their reporting of the CO to PAID, the CA and the CRA are within their rights to continue reporting until 7 yr 6 mo subsequent to the DOFD with the OC.

What I ran into with the OC when a TL was reaged on TU (12-yrs from DOLD) is they kept referring to "open date" as a legitimate reason to be placed on cr. In my case the DOLD was left blank on the cr. 

Edited by StarkRaven$
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, centex said:

Now, even though a reporting SOL may not be reset, the recent activity CAN have a detrimental impact IF the entity were reporting the payment.  However, when dealing with a third-party entity, the prudent consumer is negotiating a pay for delete agreement.  And where that has occurred, there IS no reporting to be concerned with insofar as the third party furnisher is concerned...

 

Excellent summary (anything less would be a surprise ;) )

 

There's been ample anecdotal reporting over the years on CB in which people posted their dismay that there credit score dropped significantly after paying a collection account.  And, it's been accurately inferred that the revision of the "Date Updated" (or perhaps "Last Payment Date") field was responsible in "re-aging" the account activity for credit scoring purposes.

 

This is clearly a situation to be aware of with the older scores still used in conjunction with mortgages (FICO 2/4/5).  I believe it's still a problem under FICO 8.

 

We do have a blissful day coming -- perhaps some 10 or 15 years down the road, when FICO 9 is accepted as the prevalent credit scoring model.   The FICO 9 model developers refined their analysis and determined that PAID collections aren't an accurate predictor of future credit delinquency and such accounts are ignored for scoring purposes.  

 

Can you imagine a day where you pay an outstanding CO account ... and that's the end of the story (once you confirm it's reporting as PAID)?  You don't even have to wait for it to age off ... the FICO score benefit is immediate.  I shudder to think what cumulative time is spent on effecting removal of these accounts today.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, StarkRaven$ said:

What I ran into with the OC when a TL was reaged on TU (12-yrs from DOLD) is they kept referring to "open date" as a legitimate reason to be placed on cr. In my case the DOLD was left blank on the cr. 

While I generally grasp the situation you encountered, I'm experience some confusion with this information.

 

Most often, confusion over the "obsolete" date (date the tradeline must be removed per FCRA) occurs when an OC places an account with a CA for collection.  The CA is required to note an appropriate "DOFD" from the OC when reporting it to the CRA's, so that the account reporting doesn't extend beyond that permitted (7 yr 6 mo after DOFD).  It's not exactly infrequent that the CA reports the date the account was placed with the CA in lieu of DOFD.

 

< I recognize that you meant "DOFD" when you reference "DOLD".  But, just to clarify for others, DOFD, "date of first delinquency", references the date on which an account became delinquent and was never subsequently brought current.  For an account that was ultimately charged off and/or placed for collection, it's implicit that that "first delinquency" is the event that ultimately triggers the subsequent adverse reporting and so is the benchmark date from which "obsolescence" is determined. So, to be clear, it may not be the "very first delinquency" reported, just the first in whatever series of delinquencies led up to the CO. >

 

If you're instead talking about a tradeline reported by the OC, DOFD is implicitly determined by the tradeline content itself.  The tradeline should directly show the delinquency history and there should be no ambiguity about the DOFD with the CRA.   To comment further, it would be necessary to see the actual tradeline content.  (But, I presume you've subsequently achieved removal of the tradeline, so further discussion may be tantamount to "flogging a dead horse".)

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hdporter said:

 

I'm noting a modest nit with this information; but don't get me wrong ... this is a strong post (and I've ♥️'d it).

 

I trust you understand that the collection tradeline runs afoul of FCRA/FCDPA only if it continues to show a balance in collection.  And, when this is the case, there are two potential remedies:  removal of the inaccurate tradeline, or correction of the tradeline to report a PAID status.

 

I just want to make clear that just because you've paid the balance with the OC and demanded removal of the tradeline, you aren't necessarily entitled to that removal under FCRA/FDCPA.  (And, FWIW, I strongly believe when a collection account balance is paid directly to an OC, during a period when the account has been assigned to a CA, that the CA almost always will receive a cut of the payment under terms of the collection contract in place.)

 

Having said that, I heartily concur with your recommendation to settle with an OC, where possible, and to immediately dispute the collection tradeline with the CRA's.  I believe this maximizes the likelihood that the CA (who's fat and happy with the commission paid by the OC) may choose/neglect to respond to CRA's inquiry.  Just understand that if the CA updates their reporting of the CO to PAID, the CA and the CRA are within their rights to continue reporting until 7 yr 6 mo subsequent to the DOFD with the OC.

@hdporter I agree with everything you said. 🙂

 

There were a lot of inaccuracies with what AFNI was reporting on behalf of Comcast. I could have disputed all of them. Wrong balance, wrong dates, etc. I didn't even dispute with the credit bureaus.  I just did the bbb complaint and AFNI removed the collection after that.

 

I paid the original creditor Comcast to get a zero balance. (and then I worked with a different department in comcast to get reimbursed for the cablebox I had just paid for but that is another story lol :D )

 

Once I had proof of payment with the original creditor, there was no reason for AFNI to spend time and money fighting me. I filed a complaint with the  bbb since for some neurotic reason the collector is sensitive to bbb complaints. I found this out on this board. 🙂

 

It all could have gone wrong I agree. I might have ended up with a collection that showed as paid. There were plenty of inaccuracies in the AFNI collection I could have disputed many times. One of them probably would have worked but it would have taken time.

 

The key for me was paying the original creditor and NOT the collection agency. That gave me more options (in my opinion) for disputing inaccuracies, escalating etc, none of which would have been guaranteed to work, I agree.

 

Also, I never received a notice from AFNI before the collection ended up on my report which gave me plenty of room to contact the Illinois AG, bbb, attorneys, etc.

 

It was a risk I was willing to take because of the 76 point hit to my ficos. 

 

YMMV of course. 🙂

Edited by lgt525
spelling errors
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hdporter said:

While I generally grasp the situation you encountered, I'm experience some confusion with this information.

 

Most often, confusion over the "obsolete" date (date the tradeline must be removed per FCRA) occurs when an OC places an account with a CA for collection.  The CA is required to note an appropriate "DOFD" from the OC when reporting it to the CRA's, so that the account reporting doesn't extend beyond that permitted (7 yr 6 mo after DOFD).  It's not exactly infrequent that the CA reports the date the account was placed with the CA in lieu of DOFD.

 

< I recognize that you meant "DOFD" when you reference "DOLD".  But, just to clarify for others, DOFD, "date of first delinquency", references the date on which an account became delinquent and was never subsequently brought current.  For an account that was ultimately charged off and/or placed for collection, it's implicit that that "first delinquency" is the event that ultimately triggers the subsequent adverse reporting and so is the benchmark date from which "obsolescence" is determined. So, to be clear, it may not be the "very first delinquency" reported, just the first in whatever series of delinquencies led up to the CO. >

 

If you're instead talking about a tradeline reported by the OC, DOFD is implicitly determined by the tradeline content itself.  The tradeline should directly show the delinquency history and there should be no ambiguity about the DOFD with the CRA.   To comment further, it would be necessary to see the actual tradeline content.  (But, I presume you've subsequently achieved removal of the tradeline, so further discussion may be tantamount to "flogging a dead horse".)

At the time I ordered paper reports from Annual Credit Report. I know, I should next time order a paper report from the credit bureau. There was no payment history except CO amount. I provided a copy of the last delinquency statement to TU for dispute. It came back verified by CA. There was no entry on cr for DOFD or DOLD. That was blank. There was a "new" open date. 

 

I was screwed because I initially disputed over the phone. So my subsequent disputes providing old CR with the proper reporting and that it aged off along with a copy of the last statement did no good. Interesting the CA and the OC never did soft pulls of my CR. Exactly one year later the CO vanished from the cr without any action on my part.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So what should I do is the question? LOL

 

@w00t I just discovered your post and that you had the same issue that I am having with CREDENCE RESOURCE MANA for your AT&T account. 

 

They just started reporting and hit my Experian FICO 8 by 16 points. This account is several years old and the unpaid debt showing is for $417. 

 

How did you get this removed from the reports and what should I do? Please advise. I really would be grateful for your help. 

 

 

Edited by maverick9
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 7 months later...

Hello CB family,

 

After a fight of it, I just had it removed for the 2nd time off all reports and scores jumped 16 points up. 

 

Now, so that this doesn't get reinserted for the 3rd time, if I contact AT&T to pay it, will this keep it off my records or should I just let alone? Please advise family, I need the points and the loan for the house purchase coming up. It's a critical item as it's the only collection that was on my reports. 

 

Thanks in advance!

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/12/2021 at 3:30 AM, legaleagle2012 said:

If it's a small amount, pay it and be done with it. This could still be within SOL depending on where you're hiding.

Sorry for a dumb question here but should I call AT&T directly and pay it over the phone? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, maverick9 said:

Sorry for a dumb question here but should I call AT&T directly and pay it over the phone? 

If you cannot pay it online, I would go into a store and get an actual paper receipt.

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.




  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      182,438
    • Most Online
      2,046

    Newest Member
    DLWrigh18
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines