American Collection Systems, Inc. - best way to proceed?

That does not seem to be proper validation to me, if it is not your debt then tell them that they did not send proper validation. Explain that it is not yours and that they need to remove it from your CR or you will sue them for reporting inaccurate information per FCRA law. Simple as that.

There is a slim possibility that it may actually belong to me. The dates put it just about the time of my divorce, and the ex was into some truly crazy doin's at the time. Could have maybe been something of her doing. But I'm listed as both 'Patient' and 'Garantor', and I was never treated at that hospital for anything.

As a separate issue, what do you make of my date concerns? The date of services was 7/6/2000, according to my attached statement. Then it gets carried as 90 days from 11/2/2000 until 10/17/2001, 11.5 months. Now, looking at my EX CR, it was reported by the CA as "Date Opened: 01/2002" and "Date of Status: 12/2003". EX says it's scheduled to stay on record until 9/2008. Unless my meager math skills heve fled entirely, that's something like 8 years. EX did include a notation on my report that "This item was verified and updated on Dec
2007". I'd sure like to know how they verified it.

I wouldn't normally be willing to pay those sort of collectors anything. But you'd be spending more than $14 sending several certified letters back and forth. And unless you can find more than one or two violations by the CA, you might have trouble getting the case heard. As you know, which ever you do, get everything strictly in writing beforehand.

[quote=LawStudent]I wouldn't normally be willing to pay those sort of collectors anything. But you'd be spending more than $14 sending several certified letters back and forth.[/quote]

My point, exactly.

[quote=LawStudent]As you know, which ever you do, get everything strictly in writing beforehand.[/quote]

Count on it.

Having said all of the above... In case it's not blindingly obvious, my goal is to get this thing removed from my record. If I have to pay, so be it. The question now, is, if I pay the damn thing, am I gonna get stuck with "paid-collections" or equivalent, and if so, for how long? I would much rather have it gone completely, even if it costs a little more in postage than the debt is worth. Can the CA remove their line from my report if I can negotiate that with them?

They can remove anything they put there. If you just want it removed send a no-nonsense pay for delete letter, hit em hard..tell them, take the money, remove the listing..or wait a year and never get one red cent.

okay...this may be a very stupid question here because I have never dealt with anything like this....
wulf could easily pay the $14 debt but I think question is when and if he does..will it finally be behind him? I'm sure he'd send these a%&holes a $20 dollar bill to clear it up if he wanted to....

the problem I see here is this......

if it is this hard to get resolution on a $14 dollar debt..do these petty debts that amount to buttons...at most.... end up affecting your credit score more than a $1,400 debt?

It looks like they reaged the account. It might be too much trouble to go through a civil suit for this (but you could certainly take the more $3k for reporting it incorrectly. The choice is yours. However I would strongly suggest AG/FTC complaints to be filed. Let the state/federal government bust them. That will cost you a postage stamp (assuming your/their state AG's office doesn't have electronic complaint filing.

Either way, if they reaged please report it. The more these practices are known to government authorities the better.

[quote=goldenbast]They can remove anything they put there. If you just want it removed send a no-nonsense pay for delete letter, hit em hard..tell them, take the money, remove the listing..or wait a year and never get one red cent.[/quote]

That was my thinking. The money is pretty much secondary on this, because it's so little.

Anybody got a good template for a pay-for-delete letter? I found one on this site somewhere a while back, but now I can't seem to find it.

[quote=socksfullofrocks]okay...this may be a very stupid question here because I have never dealt with anything like this....[/quote]

The only stupid question is the one you didn't ask. I ain't gonna bite yer head off, girl.

[quote=socksfullofrocks]wulf could easily pay the $14 debt but I think question is when and if he does..will it finally be behind him? I'm sure he'd send these a%&holes a $20 dollar bill to clear it up if he wanted to....[/quote]

Seems like you understand more than you're lettin' on. It ain't about the money, and never has been. It's about principle. There really are some things in life that are more important than money.

I want this off my report. And I don't want to spend more months or years with a 'paid-collections' entry on my report if I can help it.

I could play hardball here, sue or what have you. I may yet. But my ultimate goal remains the same. If just throwing $14 at the problem will accomplish that the fastest and cheapest, I'm willing to consider it.

[quote=socksfullofrocks]the problem I see here is this......

if it is this hard to get resolution on a $14 dollar debt..do these petty debts that amount to buttons...at most.... end up affecting your credit score more than a $1,400 debt?[/quote]

Understand that I have not yet contacted the CA in this matter. It's not like we've been mailing stuff back and forth for months. I wanted to be sure I had all my ducks in a row before I made initial contact, hence this thread.

In some ways, I think a $1,400 debt would be easier to deal with than this niggling little balance. On a larger amount, the CA would be looking at a pretty decent slice as commission. On this, the whole amount is barely enough for pizza and a beer. That being the case, the CA may be less motivated to reach an accomodation with me.

[quote=JCEMT]It looks like they reaged the account. It might be too much trouble to go through a civil suit for this (but you could certainly take the more $3k for reporting it incorrectly. The choice is yours. However I would strongly suggest AG/FTC complaints to be filed. Let the state/federal government bust them. That will cost you a postage stamp (assuming your/their state AG's office doesn't have electronic complaint filing.

Either way, if they reaged please report it. The more these practices are known to government authorities the better.[/quote]

Here's a question for ya, bud: That seven-year reporting limit, what is the start point of that? I've been laboring along under the assumption that the clock starts ticking when the account first becomes delinquent with the OC. What I'm looking for here is proof on whether or not it's been re-aged. What, specifically, should I be looking for?

On filing AG/FTC complaints... Count on it, just as soon as I have a full understanding of what the situation is. On taking legal action: That depends on how they react to me. I'm perfectly willing to be reasonable. But if they want to be dicks about it, I'm perfectly willing to sue over their violations. Like I've said before, it's a matter of principle.

When the original creditor should have fallen off your CR, thats when all collection accounts linked to it need to be deleted. It should start much as sol does, date of first delinquency. If I understand credit reporting right the date opened by the CA needs to match the date opened by the OC.

[quote=JCEMT]When the original creditor should have fallen off your CR, thats when all collection accounts linked to it need to be deleted. It should start much as sol does, date of first delinquency. If I understand credit reporting right the date opened by the CA needs to match the date opened by the OC.[/quote]

OK, been doin' a little research on the side here....

I found a clarification of 'date of first delinquency' here (scroll down to item #6, about halfway down). According to that line of logic, my account [yeah, right!] would have initially become delinquent on or about 9/27/2000, which is the date it's first shown as being 30 days past due. Seven years from then was 9/27/2007, three months ago. By my understanding, the account should have dropped off my report then. But the CRA [Experian, in this case], says they verified and updated it in 12/2007, and that it stays until 9/2008. I'm at a loss to see how they could have verified this. I'm thinking to call them, but that'll have to wait until Monday at earliest.

Anyway, here's what they have listed on my report:



Can you see how any of the dates they have reported have any bearing to what's on the statement the CA sent? The only correlation I see is that EX shows it scheduled to come off in 09/2008, the same month as it first went delinquent back in 2000. But that would be eight years, not seven. As I stated earlier, I'm at something of a loss to understand this. After all, a collection agency would never lie about something like this...

I would certainly say it's been reaged by about a year and for Experian to report it then they could be tossed right in the civil suit. Did you dispute it?

It just really boils down to how much effort you want to put into this and how much flack your willing to take. It could all be on principle.

Did you also notice that it seems to have an original balance of $7 and now it is $14? The fact it is such a small amount shouldn't matter..what if it was 300 bucks originally then doubled to 600? I'm sure you would be screaming then. (I sure would.)

You could DV the company, go through the whole pain in the butt process???????heck, if you get them on enough violations, that little $14 bug bite can reap you a couple thousand bucks. :)

Then you have the credit agency themselves. I am ????????SO- fed up with them. It looks like they don????????t know what the heck they are doing either. You could start pestering them with method of verification and possibly even take them to court.

But it all boils down to how much aggravation do you want to take.
:lol:

[quote=JCEMT]I would certainly say it's been reaged by about a year and for Experian to report it then they could be tossed right in the civil suit. Did you dispute it?[/quote]

Yes, I disputed it in December. That's what prompted the 'verified & updated' bit I mentioned earlier. It's shown in the upper-right corner of the report snippet I posted:

You might be surprised at some of the things I've been known to do in the name of 'principle' over the years. Suing a CA for being dicks over $14 isn't my idea of fun, but it's not beyond the realm of possibility, either.



That fact hadn't escaped my beady-eyed gaze, I assure you.



Well, it is winter in New England. It's not like I could be riding instead.

Anybody got a phone contact for Experian that will allow me to talk to a real person? I've just wasted an afternoon tryin' to get past their voice-prompt maze.

I don't think there is an option.

That would just about figure.

Am I outta line here? All I want to ask them is [1] how did they 'verify' this, and [2] why is it still on my report after 7+ years? What do you think my next step oughtta be?

You can try sending them something in the mail.
It says on their website for questions about your credit report to call the number on your credit report.

That's about all I have.

I figured that was gonna be the answer, but I had to try....

I'm working up a letter at the moment. It'll go to the CRA[s] as needed, and also be copied to the Vermont AG and the FTC. I hate writing these kind of things, so I might as well get as much mileage out of it as I can.

Hey JCEMT! Have a look at this thread.....

http://www.debtconsolidationcare.com/credit-repair/about40938.html#310481

To talk to a real person, you might try pushing the "0" button on your phone several times real fast. That has worked for me in the past.

A summons works wonders for getting a phone call from the spawn of satan,but I digress. :lol: :lol:

thanx unc..you are the real deal here!

as far as pushing the O button real fast

wish that would work!!! always and forever!

Something else that works occasionally is to say 'operator' or 'agent' when prompted for a voice response. These are default responses available in several call-manager packages out of the box. Whether it works or not depends on the software they're using, and how they have it programmed.