Collections, but Comcast didn't let me pay.

[Bluesie58]

1 hour ago, legaleagle2012 said:

The CA was hired by Comcast, therefore the doctrine of agency applies with Comcast as the principal. they are in control of the agent. This one just screams for arbitration; hit them in the pocketbook and watch them change their tune.

The issue is resolved, so what is there to arbitrate?  The OP worked hard and deserves to be able to move on.  Good grief!

[Flyingifr]

Let's re-examine this. Someone else paid off your account, then backed the payment of your account out with a  charge-back, and it took a couple of months to get this part figured out with Comcast, so Comcast shut down your ability to pay them and then dings you for a late payment. Do I have it right so far?

 

If you were me I would be screaming "Identity Theft" and dispute the delinquency, which you (a) did not make and (b) tried to rectify when you found out about it, but Comcast prevented you from doing so. That sounds like maliciousness and Judges absolutely HATE that. Get a couple of declination letters from mortgage lenders and then sue Comcast and their CA. Either you cannot get the mortgage because of this or you get rate-jacked because of it, either is a legitimate Cause of Action in a civil suit. FDCPA does not apply to this. Get a good lawyer and Comcast may be buying you a house.

[FixTheProblems]

15 hours ago, Flyingifr said:

Let's re-examine this. Someone else paid off your account, then backed the payment of your account out with a  charge-back, and it took a couple of months to get this part figured out with Comcast, so Comcast shut down your ability to pay them and then dings you for a late payment. Do I have it right so far?

 

If you were me I would be screaming "Identity Theft" and dispute the delinquency, which you (a) did not make and (b) tried to rectify when you found out about it, but Comcast prevented you from doing so. That sounds like maliciousness and Judges absolutely HATE that. Get a couple of declination letters from mortgage lenders and then sue Comcast and their CA. Either you cannot get the mortgage because of this or you get rate-jacked because of it, either is a legitimate Cause of Action in a civil suit. FDCPA does not apply to this. Get a good lawyer and Comcast may be buying you a house.

 

You have the first part right. And Comcast shut down my ability to pay right at the beginning, immediately after the charge-back.

 

However, Comcast didn't prevent me from rectifying it when I contacted them through the VP's office. They were actually surprisingly cooperative and competent (I've never seen this side of Comcast), though not as quick to respond as I'd have liked (took weeks to resolve instead of days). The CA however, was a huge pain to deal with, which nearly doubled the timeline and added far more stress.

 

We actually lost a house we wanted in the middle of all of this. I have two letters of mortgage applications that were outright declined because of the credit score, and one letter offering a lower loam amount, and rates and points way higher than average, amounting to a lot. However, as @Bluesie58 mentioned, we'd like to put this behind and move on.

 

PS: the payment included two "late charges" to Comcast that I'm sore about on principle, though the amounts were minor. But I'm not about to waste time and risk reopening this issue and landing who knows where.

 

PPS: Quite honestly, it's also a ridiculous scoring system if one single collections account that's not even a couple hundred dollars, in an otherwise spotless history, can drop one's score from like the 99th percentile to "most lenders won't even consider your application." Particularly if it's zero fault of mine, and one I had zero control over. If I had a magic wand I could sue someone out of business with, it would be FICO2/4/5 scores. That would probably make society much better than Comcast fixing its bureaucratic incompetence.

Edited May 31 by FixTheProblems

[Flyingifr]

"We actually lost a house we wanted in the middle of all of this. I have two letters of mortgage applications that were outright declined because of the credit score, and one letter offering a lower loam amount, and rates and points way higher than average, amounting to a lot. However, as @Bluesie58 mentioned, we'd like to put this behind and move on. "

 

This is why they get away with these shennanigans. If you were me, they would already have the summons claiming the cost of the house you lost as damages, plus attorneys fees and millions in exemplary damages, with a threat to turn it into a class Action suit if Discovery shows they did it to more people than just you. But, then again, you're not me, are you?

[MarvBear]

@Flyingifr   You came across as more than just a bit rude in your comment. Who are you to judge if the Original Poster is satisfied with the results?

[Flyingifr]

24 minutes ago, MarvBear said:

@Flyingifr   You came across as more than just a bit rude in your comment. Who are you to judge if the Original Poster is satisfied with the results?

I was not judging, just stating how I would be handling this situation. It is one thing if the delinquency was caused by the OP, but the events described leave the impression that the OP is being dinged for events he had absolutely no part in, no control over and was unable to rectify. Judging the OP? No, I am in complete sympathy with the OP and wish him well. It is Comcast that I would be after (and their CA) because IMHO the OP is completely innocent in this instance, and deserves to be made whole. If the OP is satisfied with the results, then I am satisfied with and for him, but I figured others might be in the same situation and might want another way of looking at it.

[hdporter]

1 hour ago, Flyingifr said:

I was not judging, just stating how I would be handling this situation.

 

It would likely be preferable that you not defend your post, but just assure @MarvBear that you'll try to keep any "attitude" in check.  Marv rarely calls someone out on their tone, so the best response is to not be defensive.

 

I grasp your intent in the substance of your post, but I found it to be a little too much "in your face" for constructive input.  Your core message, however, is entirely rational and reasonable.

'

While you've been inactive for much of the last few years, you're a long term member, with a respectable track record.   And, if you're the same poster over on flyertalk with the same handle, I've always valued your input there (and, again, we're talking years).  So all I'm trying to ensure with this response is that you not take it personally ... I like that you're posting here again!

[shifter]

2 hours ago, Flyingifr said:

It is one thing if the delinquency was caused by the OP, but the events described leave the impression that the OP is being dinged for events he had absolutely no part in, no control over and was unable to rectify.

I mean he owed them money and didn't pay it. The fact that they were making it difficult to pay via card didn't relieve him of the duty to pay. You can always go into an office with cash or a check or whatever they may take and get your final receipt with a $0 balance. So this isn't a situation where the OP had no liability for what transpired. 

[FixTheProblems]

14 hours ago, shifter said:

I mean he owed them money and didn't pay it. The fact that they were making it difficult to pay via card didn't relieve him of the duty to pay. You can always go into an office with cash or a check or whatever they may take and get your final receipt with a $0 balance. So this isn't a situation where the OP had no liability for what transpired. 

 

Not that I want to sue Comcast, but to be clear here: I only found *much later* that going in to a regional office and paying with a check might *possibly* have worked earlier on. I spent hours and hours on phone calls last year trying to pay online, and all I knew was, my account was locked out of being able to accept payments, and nobody had any clue why. I had no reason to suspect a check payment was possible (and perhaps it wasn't possible, and my account was simply locked out completely back then, I still don't know).

 

I know my OP might read like only credit/debit cards were blocked, but that was written with the benefit of hindsight, and based on a guess.

 

So, "he owed them money and didn't pay it" is quite misleading. If I had purposefully or even callously not paid, perhaps it's not a completely unfair statement. But that wasn't the case. I made many phone calls to sort the issue out, unsuccessfully. In fact, I believe the case numbers from those phone calls made it easy for Comcast to see that I'd attempted to pay, in good faith, several times. In one of those calls, an agent suggested I wait 30-60 days for a "cycle to complete" and re-attempt my payment to see if the account would get unlocked. It didn't, and the advise only moved me much closer to the credit reporting fiasco.

 

So I completely disagree that I had any liability here. This was on Comcast, not me.

Edited June 1 by FixTheProblems

[Flyingifr]

18 hours ago, hdporter said:

 

It would likely be preferable that you not defend your post, but just assure @MarvBear that you'll try to keep any "attitude" in check.  Marv rarely calls someone out on their tone, so the best response is to not be defensive.

 

I grasp your intent in the substance of your post, but I found it to be a little too much "in your face" for constructive input.  Your core message, however, is entirely rational and reasonable.

'

While you've been inactive for much of the last few years, you're a long term member, with a respectable track record.   And, if you're the same poster over on flyertalk with the same handle, I've always valued your input there (and, again, we're talking years).  So all I'm trying to ensure with this response is that you not take it personally ... I like that you're posting here again!

You make a good point - all my life my positions have had little "filter" and even at my advanced age I let my strong feelings be shown. Please be assured that my intention is always to be constructive. I am the same Flyingifr at Flyertalk and who owned Debtorboards.

Edited June 1 by Flyingifr

[Flyingifr]

2 hours ago, FixTheProblems said:

 

Not that I want to sue Comcast, but to be clear here: I only found *much later* that going in to a regional office and paying with a check might *possibly* have worked earlier on. I spent hours and hours on phone calls last year trying to pay online, and all I knew was, my account was locked out of being able to accept payments, and nobody had any clue why. I had no reason to suspect a check payment was possible (and perhaps it wasn't possible, and my account was simply locked out completely back then, I still don't know).

 

I know my OP might read like only credit/debit cards were blocked, but that was written with the benefit of hindsight, and based on a guess.

 

So, "he owed them money and didn't pay it" is quite misleading. If I had purposefully or even callously not paid, perhaps it's not a completely unfair statement. But that wasn't the case. I made many phone calls to sort the issue out, unsuccessfully. In fact, I believe the case numbers from those phone calls made it easy for Comcast to see that I'd attempted to pay, in good faith, several times. In one of those calls, an agent suggested I wait 30-60 days for a "cycle to complete" and re-attempt my payment to see if the account would get unlocked. It didn't, and the advise only moved me much closer to the credit reporting fiasco.

 

So I completely disagree that I had any liability here. This was on Comcast, not me.

Quite reasonable. But.... sometimes companies can be very difficult to (how do you say it tactfully) be reasonable. If you have ever raised goats (I have) you learn quickly that you have to get their attention somehow. I sometimes had to use a 2x4 board to do that. When a company is unreasonable, I have found that nothing gets their attention faster than getting sued. I also had "dings" on my credit at one time, and I used that philosophy to get all the baddies removed. Please keep in mind that Comcast has a tradition of being absolutely miserable in Customer satisfaction surveys - them as a company and their industry as a whole. This has been the truth for decades now, and it obviously continues.

[Flyingifr]

17 hours ago, shifter said:

I mean he owed them money and didn't pay it. The fact that they were making it difficult to pay via card didn't relieve him of the duty to pay. You can always go into an office with cash or a check or whatever they may take and get your final receipt with a $0 balance. So this isn't a situation where the OP had no liability for what transpired. 

I will grant you that, but why should a company be so intransigent as to make it a chore to pay them? I have no idea why, but some companies today have (IMHO) forgotten that they need the customer more than the customer needs them. Case-in-point -I live in western PA now. There is a large supermarket chain here that also has gasoline stations. I shop at the supermarket at least once a week, often more, and I use their loyalty card to accumulate points at my purchase. The gas station arm, has decided that in order to get those same points for gas purchases, I have to provide them with (and I am not kidding) (a) a copy of my driver's license, (b) a copy of a recent utility bill, (c) a copy of my deed showing I own my home and (e) a copy of my social security card (this is NOT a credit card or any other type of credit I am trying to get, just points at their gasoline pumps - this is to allow me to pay at the pump using a Debit or Credit Card issued elsewhere). When I asked why I need to provide all this to essentially pay cash for the gas, all I got was "company policy."  OK, they can keep the damned card and they can keep their gas also.

Edited June 1 by Flyingifr