Creditor's Inter...

[treehugger1]

Got a new call from Creditor's interchange. These guys are a CA attempting to collect on a BOA account that was sold to LVNV. BoA no longer owns the account. After I told them I don't discuss personal finacial issues over hte phone, but needed a letter sent within 5 days, they sent off the dunning letter. I sent the DV and "all calls are inconvenient" letter. I guess I'll know in a month or two what their intentions are. Last time this happened, CACH purchased a debt and sent this to some cheap attorney firm out-of-state. That account is rotting somewhere.

I've also heard that LVNV will often move for arbitration. I'm curious what they will do for this debt since the NAF, etc has been forced out of business.

The alleged debt is far under my state's small claims limit, but to go for small claims they need to show up in court without an attorney.

I wonder what they bought this debt for? 2 - 10 cents on the dollar, I would guess.

I've read that LVNV is notorious as debt collectors. So far they have played by the rules with respect to this alleged debt.

As a side note, BoA first sent this to a couple of other CA's for assignment. It appears they sold the debt.

I have to wonder if any of these JDB's actually look at the debt portfolios they buy. In the current times, they must pay pennies on the doller due to the risk involved. I now have 2 out of 10 remaining unpaid accounts in the hands of JDB's, with aribitration out, and they will pay a large sum to come to my world of courts here in the Oregon Outback.

Oh, yes, the interesting thing is that when they called last week, they acted as if they were collecting on a BoA account, but the dunning letter clearly states the current creditor is LVNV. I wish I would have recorded the call to record them saying they were collecting for BoA. What a lie!

[AngelinaCatHub]

treehugger1: I know you get tickled out of this. What stupidity they would have to take you to a small claims Court. In FL you can use a lawyer, but why? Well we have gone up to 10K small claims so that could warrant a lawyer. When will you file? You have been around a long time. 'Hub and Mrs.

[catleg]

Funny you should mention CACH LLC. They've apparently bought a GM Card account of ours and farmed it out to the "Law Office of Joe Pezzuto LLC" in Phoenix AZ. Pretty bizarro.

[treehugger1]

BoA gave me a reasonable 2% interest five-year payoff around 18 months ago. This was after it was within about 30 days of charging off. I think I made a couple of payments, so it has probably been 14-15 months.

As always, I'm in no hurry to file, despite the fact I am bankrupt (liabilities vs assets.) I may never file, as long as I am employed and making good wages.

[junker]

i had a providian acct that was passed around to various jdb.s finally one...unifund ccr....sued me in Florida...the card was 4k....they were from out of the area,,but used a rent a lawyer...the cc was even past the sol..but they still sued...i was lucky enough to use a legal aid atty..she defended using things other than the sol..and the case was dismissed...they had to pay the rent a lawyer whatever he charged...and my legal aid lawyer 400 bucks..for the one time court appearance....they sue enmasse...when we went to judges chambers to discuss case..their lawyer hadnt even looked at my file...and wanted an extension to review the case..the judge gave him 30 days..if you are judgement proof there is absolutely no reason to file a bk..until you feel it is convenient for you...

[GoingDown]

One of my larger charged off visa card accounts is with LVNV. They sent my account to 4 different collection agencies in response to my Cease and Desist letters, and finally after I sent a C & D to the 4th collection agency, making it clear that I itended to keep on sending out C & D letters to any collection agency they want to use, and telling them I am quite judgment proof, they fell silent. And I haven't heard from them in years. They didn't even sue me over $14,000.

I agree. There is no reason to file BK if you are doing fine just being judgment proof, or whatever.

At this point, I will only file BK if one of them gets an Arizona judgment against me. So far, that looks unlikely.

[GoingDown]

i had a providian acct that was passed around to various jdb.s finally one...unifund ccr....sued me in Florida...the card was 4k....they were from out of the area,,but used a rent a lawyer...the cc was even past the sol..but they still sued...i was lucky enough to use a legal aid atty..she defended using things other than the sol..and the case was dismissed...they had to pay the rent a lawyer whatever he charged...and my legal aid lawyer 400 bucks..for the one time court appearance....they sue enmasse...when we went to judges chambers to discuss case..their lawyer hadnt even looked at my file...and wanted an extension to review the case..the judge gave him 30 days..if you are judgement proof there is absolutely no reason to file a bk..until you feel it is convenient for you...

Oh, Unifund is well known for suing on accounts that are beyond the statute of limitations. If they sued me, I would definitely show up in court and fight against it. They can be beaten.

[splinter]

I have 2 accounts that were sold to LVNV from Cap1 and Lowes (forgot who that card is with). Both were for relatively small amounts under 1k. I think the Lowes card was for only $600. Anyway, LVNV "re-aged" the debt on my credit report. I had no idea the debt had been sold to them and didn't hear from them. Then they pop up suddenly on my credit report as having defaulted on their accounts thereby resetting the SOL by like 3 years. I haven't done anything about this yet. I haven't heard from them and I'm filing Ch7 next year.

I'm not 100% sure this is illegal (resetting the SOL). I've heard under certain circumstances this may be legal. On my credit report LVNV shows as a "factoring" company that buys debt.

[treehugger1]

I think (I'm not sure) that in most states, the SOL refers to your contract with the OC. I'm not sure that just because a JDB buys the debt the account is now "new" and the SOL resets upon purchase of the debt. They purchased a contract between you and the original creditor. They are not your creditor. I'm just guessing.

[splinter]

Thanks treehugger1. You're right that the SOL has to do with the OCs. But LVNV has added their own entries into my credit report that says I defaulted with them (not the OCs). I'm guessing they're going to claim they're now the OC for the new debt that I owe to them. Because that's the only reason for anyone to add duplicate entries on a credit report for the same debt. Originally I thought this was illegal, because it's called "re-aging" the debt where they're trying to illegally reset the SOL But I heard it may not be illegal depending upon how LVNV is structured. I heard on the news that these so called "factoring" companies may be able to do this legally, but I don't know the specifics, so I could be wrong.

So LVNV is going to say, they purchased my debt. They're a factoring company, so this legally creates a new debt with them and they're now the OC on this new debt. I defaulted with them. Since they're the OC, they can now add their own negative credit entries onto my credit report and a new SOL starts with them.

But I could be wrong about all of this ;-)

[treehugger1]

As I said, each state has it's own laws related to SOL and who the SOL refers to.

In my opinion, here is the deal. Did the purchase a contract, or did they puchase a DEBT? I doubt in most states that this is the same thing.

LVNV is a part of a company called Sherman "something." So, does LVNV actually OWN the debt? I seriously doubt it. Then again, I don't know for sure. They probably were handed the debt from their parent (Sherman.) At some point, the information related to the original debt has to get lost. (Folks think that the government can't keep track of things.) LOL

The credit reporting is a different situation. If you are not adverse to openign a potential can-of-worms, send a complaint to each and every credit reporting agency denying th edebt and requesting the CRA to verify the debt. If you have copies of the train of DV requests you have sent, then include these in your complaint. While it is true that the JDB/CA can report to the CRA's that the debt is disputed by the consumer, at some point the CRA has to check this. If you play th egame long enough, I believe that eventually the CRA (Credit Reporting Agency) has to remove the tradeline.

In my case, every letter I have sent, I have also forwarded to my US Senators and Representatives (Congressmen.)

I checked today with respect to a CACH collections previously reported on my CR, and it no longer exists. I'm beginning to think that it is true that once the OC (BoA, Citi, Crap1, etc.) sell the debt, the last thing on their list of things-to-do is to provide the JDB/CA with more information. It's all about risk-management. Once a debt is actually sold, I believe the OC could care less about the consumer or the debt-buyer.

This is probably why the JDB's have a hard time establishing the debt linked to an OC. The OC could really care less after they sell the debt. Does this make sense?

JMHO (Just My Humble Opinion)

[splinter]

I think LVNV may own the debt. I don't have access to my credit report online anymore. But LVNV added the negative credit entries, so I'm assuming they must own the debt--or they're over reaching. Because I thought only OCs can add negative credit entries.

I was curious, so I went through the mountain of collection notices I've kept--2 file folders full, LOL. There are no collection letters from LVNV or that parent Sherman company. And I saw that that Lowes card was Cap1 as well. So from my 3 Cap1 CCs that I defaulted on, the 2 that were for less than 1k were sold to LVNV. The one for $3400 they got a judgement against me just a few months ago. And prejudgement I saw they jacked up my interest rate to over 28%. These debts were from 2006. I saw in the collection letters that Cap1 offered to settle that account in 2007 for 70%. I hear they don't do that anymore.

I haven't DV any of them, because I'm not spending the time or money on this. I'm guessing I would have had to send over 60 DVs if I DVed them all. That would have cost me at least a few hundred plus my time. Not going to do that. My phone ringers are off, except when I have to speak to family. I don't answer the door and I'm self employed. I'm pretty much judgement proof. I got a used car a few years ago, saw this coming, so the car isn't registered in my name, LOL. I closed my bank account earlier this year. And the only way Cap1 got that judgement against me was through a crooked process server. But after Cap1 got a recent judgement against me, maybe 3 weeks after the judgement, the law firm that sued me for Cap1 was offering to settle but no firm offer--no details. I haven't spoken to them and I'm not going to, since I'm filing Ch7 next year. They know they can't collect, but maybe they should have thought about that before they sued me.

I think you're right that by disputing the LVNV entries with the CRAs that I'd have a chance to have the LVNV entries dropped off. I'll think about that. Maybe just to see if it can be done. But when I file for Ch7 it won't matter.

But it makes sense that the OCs verifying the debt after it's sold is probably very low priorty with them. That's very useful information. Because once you see that the debt has been sold, dispute it with the CRAs and there's a good chance it'll be removed.

treehugger1, thanks for all of the info. It's been very helpful!