Collections happen

[Anonymous]

The 8/2003 and 3/2005 dates still make me doubt even parking tickets-  no way on a library card-  

I know many years ago dealing with a CA that I had to prove a few parking tickets were paid- 

I do have the reciepts for the DW paying them- BUT Phoenix is a big city- 

If they just owe me $1000 and remove- I will be OK with it-  

I will win this battle- I have lived at the same address for 9+ years

so It is not like I have been hiding from something-

---

jaybee wrote:
Maybe it is a library fine or something. Maybe someone used your name to get a library card. Can you go to you city's web page and type in your info to see? Luckily it is not a judgement, coming form the court and all.

I really can not see your city going out of the way to put a fine that is already paid on your CR.

---

[Anonymous]

I am sure you will win. Poor people. By the time this is over they will be scurrying off licking their wounds. Go get em' Tim!!

Hopefully the Dv works and you do not have to go much further than that, especially since you have been in the same place for soooo long.

[Anonymous]

I have also sent the DV and Non-PP INQ letter via courier -

They will have it in the morning as well-

---

jaybee wrote:
I am sure you will win. Poor people. By the time this is over they will be scurrying off licking their wounds. Go get em' Tim!!

Hopefully the Dv works and you do not have to go much further than that, especially since you have been in the same place for soooo long.

---

[Anonymous]

The INQ is gone-

Glad I have printed copies-

No other reponse-

[Anonymous]

can't be retro in terms of when the judge ruled.... opens too many nuances for retro applicability.  And personally I would not want to be looking at a lawsuit (or criminal charges) for something that was legal when I did it but now a judge says isn't.  WAY SCARY to set that precedent. 

Example (purely fictional!!!!).  I get stopped for DWI in December (.09 BAL which is just UNDER the limit at that time) Limit changed to .08 in Jan - now they want to charge me because the limit is lower....... like I said VERY SCARY precedent.

[Anonymous]

You are much closer to being a lawyer than me- BUT

The law did not change and FCRA did not change-

A court of Law said- This is how we understand how this is read- and here is this case that was started 4 years ago and we are ruling on it and setting the precedent- 

---

Lady_Scarlet wrote:

can't be retro in terms of when the judge ruled.... opens too many nuances for retro applicability.  And personally I would not want to be looking at a lawsuit (or criminal charges) for something that was legal when I did it but now a judge says isn't.  WAY SCARY to set that precedent. 

Example (purely fictional!!!!).  I get stopped for DWI in December (.09 BAL which is just UNDER the limit at that time) Limit changed to .08 in Jan - now they want to charge me because the limit is lower....... like I said VERY SCARY precedent.

---

[Anonymous]

If someone was within appeal period then use they could use the NEW caselaw in the appeal - from 4 years prior case is 'settled' period. - okay there are SOL for bringing actions (1 year in case of FCRA) - so 'maybe' someone within  that year of SOL could bring action... CA would stand on idea at the time there was no law against it, consumer would point to Pinto and the lengthy litigation.  After the ruling (and only in the 9th Circuit, BTW)- it's the 'law'.  Other circuits 'take into consideration' the ruling if you are presenting for arguement - but they are not required to abide by it (hence a 'new ruling' for that circuit)

There will end up being a PINTO  ruling (yea or nay) in probably every circuit - and some may conflict - which is very bad because I doubt SCOTUS has the time for an INQ trial and it really isn't a 'constitutional issue' but a legal one (send to congress for clarification - haha!)

---

Timothy wrote:

You are much closer to being a lawyer than me- BUT

The law did not change and FCRA did not change-

A court of Law said- This is how we understand how this is read- and here is this case that was started 4 years ago and we are ruling on it and setting the precedent- 

[Anonymous]

---

Timothy wrote:

I have YET to find anything in FCRA or FDCPA that makes ANY distinction between a "Hard" and a "Soft"

---

Check out FCRA 604(c)(3).  It specifies which inquiries a CRA may NOT include on a report, but it includes an exception for reports generated for the consumer himself/herself.  I believe this clause is the origin of the hard vs. soft distinction.

Specifically, FCRA 604(c)(3) says that a report may not include inquiries in connection with credit or insurance transactions that are not initiated by the consumer.

Good luck in your collections battle!

Message Edited by cheddar on 02-20-2008 06:52 PM

Message Edited by cheddar on 02-20-2008 06:53 PM

[Anonymous]

I sent DV 2/12

I got FULL Media validation today from the CA- $232.31

They ask for me to pay the OC.

Weird stuff here-

Parking ticket (expired meter) and Parking ticket (expired reg)

In AZ you are required to change you address and I did in Oct 1999

(to my current address) My License and reg have never expired-

Tickets are from 1/4/2002 - with my old address from 1999 listed in the court papers-  considering fighting this-

there is a slight chance the Tag said Jan 02 at the time but was not expired-

BUT-

I also got a letter from the city offering a PFD if I pay by 3/3/08 waiving the collection fees for total payment-$151

Now at least I know where everyone is getting their number from -

it's still BS-

Never got a paper ticket, never served, no notice, nothing-

I have been at the same address for over 8 years!!!!!!!

[Dawn]

Geez ... one more thing to have to keep up with forever ... your dated registration renewal receipt!

DS had a rather "overbearing" officer stop him some time ago.  He was bound and determined to issue a citation for something ... anything.  So ... he gave him a ticket for an expired registration.  Sent me through the roof.  This was in January 2007 and his inspection and registration stickers (placed on the windshield in Texas) are both always due in the same month (last day of December 2006.)    You can't even GET the inspection sticker without proof of current registration.

This particular year, the license plates were also replaced, so he had a new license plate number that was already on the car before the ticket was issued in January 2007.   When the officer ran whatever check they run on the license plates, he should have gotten confirmation that the registration was current even if he needed glasses to read the silly sticker!

I took the receipt for payment of the registration renewal (from Decemer 2006) and the inspection sticker receipt (from December 2006) that referenced the new plate number (second form of proof that the registration had been taken care of prior to the end of December) to the police station and talked with a supervisor about the citation, as well as other issues related to that "stop."  I got the ticket dismissed.  I hope you can find whatever you need to get yours taken care of.