The same account charged off twice?
Date: Fri, 10/19/2007 - 16:44
Well, I think LVNV has moved in a direction I have not anticipated. We disputed with the CRAs when LVNV got our validation request. Well, we just got info back from the CRA. LVNV has updated the account to show it is now charged off and sold.
Can a CA charge off an account that has already been charged off? It was a Walmart card that Walmart has already charged off. I didn’t think a CA could charge off something that has already been charged off….it looks like they are leaving it on the credit report with those new notes.
Also, isn’t it a violation to sell a disputed debt?
I’m getting ready to write a very strongly worded letter to LVNV, an intent to sue actually since their 30 days was up today. I am just wanting to make sure they can’t charge off a previously charged off account and leave it on our credit report un-validated.
I read somewhere that LVNV likes to pretend they are the OC…I think that is what they are doing in this case, the jerks.
Can a CA charge off an account that has already been charged off? It was a Walmart card that Walmart has already charged off. I didn’t think a CA could charge off something that has already been charged off….it looks like they are leaving it on the credit report with those new notes.
Also, isn’t it a violation to sell a disputed debt?
I’m getting ready to write a very strongly worded letter to LVNV, an intent to sue actually since their 30 days was up today. I am just wanting to make sure they can’t charge off a previously charged off account and leave it on our credit report un-validated.
I read somewhere that LVNV likes to pretend they are the OC…I think that is what they are doing in this case, the jerks.
I recall a case where a individual won a fdcpa suit for coercion
I recall a case where a individual won a fdcpa suit for coercion collection via CRA filing. In short even though it had been disputed and the CA could not provide documentation they still continued to report to the major CRAs, which turned out to be (per court ruling) a form of masked coercion; or in plain English, a attempt to collect therefor being a FDCPA violation.
Additionally since they have charged off the debt selling it to another CA that means the tradeline has to be removed per FCRA statute. As to the question of if they may lawfully sell a disputed debt I have submitted the question to the Federal Trade Commission, as soon as they get back to me I will let you know.
