cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Unifund is manipulating the way they report a CO from 2004

tag
Chopbrocoli
Established Contributor

Re: Unifund is manipulating the way they report a CO from 2004

Miss Kiss, are they reporting the "Account Type" as open or are the listing the "Account Status" as open?
AMEX Gold Premier Rewards | SPG AMEX | Bank of America Power Rewards | Merrill Plus | United Presidential Plus | Saks World Elite
Message 11 of 32
Anonymous
Not applicable

Re: Unifund is manipulating the way they report a CO from 2004

On my EQ CR they list the account type as open, and on my EX CR it is listed as an installment account.
Message 12 of 32
Chopbrocoli
Established Contributor

Re: Unifund is manipulating the way they report a CO from 2004


@Anonymous wrote:
Have you resolved your problem yet with unifund?  I am in a similar situation with unifund regarding a CC with Chase.  Looking at my EQ CR they are listing my account as a Factoring Company account.  Is this a violation of the FCRA/FDCPA? 
 
An "account type" as open is perfectly fine, however listing the "status" as open might be an issue. As for listing the account as a "factoring company".. I dont see how that is a violation because they are INDEED a "factoring company." In accounting, a factor (debt buyers) is someone who purchases distressed passed due receivables from creditors or various intermediary. 
AMEX Gold Premier Rewards | SPG AMEX | Bank of America Power Rewards | Merrill Plus | United Presidential Plus | Saks World Elite
Message 13 of 32
Anonymous
Not applicable

Re: Unifund is manipulating the way they report a CO from 2004

It was my understanding that a "factoring company" dealt mostly in the area of accounts receivable between 2 businesses not in the area of JDB of old credit card debts.  Is a "factoring company" the same as a CA?  Are they bound by the same rules under the FDCPA/FCRA?  It seems to me that Unifund is pretending to be like an American Express CC reporting in such a way as to look as if I opened an account with them and that the balance is due every month and then every month they report me as being late making it look like I have a new late every month on my CR's   
Message 14 of 32
Chopbrocoli
Established Contributor

Re: Unifund is manipulating the way they report a CO from 2004

Credit card debt falls under accounts receivable because the creditors loaned the money/ service to the customer. Once they loan the money to the customer, they post the amount the customer charged into accounts receivable (an asset account). Also, when it comes to interest on the debt, they will post that into an interest receivable account. Now the creditor needs to reduce the accounts receivable account and convert it into cash... by doing that, they will collect by sending out monthly statements or for maxed out customers/ past due customers...call them 4-5 times a day. 

 

The credit card companies or banks have options when it comes to dealing with their "distressed receivables" (defaulted credit card debt/ loans). They can either perform inhouse collections, outsource them to a CA or they can "charge off" the bad debt receivables ... thus liquidating their bad debt receivables to a JDB (factor). The most common factoring companies are LVNV (Resurgent Capital), West Asset Mgt, Unifund, and etc who acquires distresses receivables from creditors such as GEMB, BoA, Citi, WFNNB, etc.. 

 

Factoring companies are not a collection agency. They are simply a company that purchases and manages distressed assets. However, they do have an option to establish their own call center and collect if they can save money and increase net income. But most of the time, a factor will outsource their receivables to a CA due to fixed, variable costs, labor, and time constraints.  There seems to be a lot of confusion when it comes to distinguishing between a CA and a Factor due to the ambiguous language that our awesome government has put out as well as misinformed consumers. The only true way to find out is for the federal judge to interpret the laws and hopefully the financial language. Hope that helps! 

Message Edited by Chopbrocoli on 07-17-2009 06:15 PM
AMEX Gold Premier Rewards | SPG AMEX | Bank of America Power Rewards | Merrill Plus | United Presidential Plus | Saks World Elite
Message 15 of 32
Anonymous
Not applicable

Re: Unifund is manipulating the way they report a CO from 2004

Yes, thank you, it does help me understand the difference between a CA and a Factoring Company.  So it means that Unifund is technically not a CA which is why they are listed as "other accounts" on my CR and my CR says I have 0 collections on my report.  I guess what I need to know is what is the best way to get them off my CR all together.  I already disputed with the CRA's which only TU deleted them from their records, so now they only appear on my EQ and EX CR's.  I DV'd them and all they sent me was some billing statements from Chase, none from the OC which was Heritage First USA before they were bought out by Chase.  They will not, or can not send any other proof because they don't have it, they haven't sent me an application or contract signed by me that proves that this account belongs to me.  Even though this is a legitimate debt with the OC, I do not agree with the amount Unifund says I owe because it is more than $2000.00 than I originally owed.  So, what is best?  PFD for a % of the total? Or just let it lie until the 7.5 yrs is up.  The SOL date has already passed so I am not obligated to give them anything, but I refuse to pay them what they are saying I owe when they won't, or can't send me supporting evidence that I owe them what they say.  If I did choose to PFD with them, just to get them off my CR, which would totally clean up my CR's, how much should I offer? 
Message 16 of 32
Chopbrocoli
Established Contributor

Re: Unifund is manipulating the way they report a CO from 2004

Exactly, they are "technially" not a CA. As for the validation, please read the excerpt of the FDCPA provided by the FTC:

 

§ 809. Validation of debts
(a) Within five days after the initial communication with a consumer in connection with the collection of any debt, a debt collector shall, unless the following information is contained in the initial communication or the consumer has paid the debt, send the consumer a written notice containing—
(1) the amount of the debt;
(2) the name of the creditor to whom the debt is owed;
(3) a statement that unless the consumer, within thirty days after receipt of the notice, disputes the validity of the debt, or any portion thereof, the debt will be assumed to be valid by the debt collector;
(4) a statement that if the consumer notifies the debt collector
in writing within the thirty-day period that the debt, or any portion thereof, is disputed, the debt collector
will obtain verification of the debt or a copy of a judgment against the consumer and a copy of such verification or judgment will be mailed to the consumer by the debt collector; and
(5) a statement that, upon the consumer’s written request within the thirty-day period, the debt collector will provide the consumer with the name and address of the original creditor, if different from the current creditor.
(b) If the consumer notifies the debt collector in writing within the thirty-day period described in subsection (a) that the debt, or any portion thereof, is disputed, or that the consumer
requests the name and address of the original 

the debt collector shall cease collection of the debt, or any disputed portion thereof, until the debt collector obtains verification of the debt or any copy of a judgment, or the name and address of the original creditor, and a copy of such verification or judgment, or name and address of the original creditor

 

As you can see,  it seems to me that Unifund has done their due dilligence in providing the name of the OC, address, and even a billing statement. I don't see anywhere in the FDCPA that requires a CA to provide an itemized statement, signed agreement, and etc. It's not that they dont have the proof, its that Unifund has already complied with the rules of the FDCPA. 

 

The next thing you can do is offer the PFD in writing. I've heard many successful outcomes when it comes to dealing with PFD's and post deletions with JDB's and CA's. 

AMEX Gold Premier Rewards | SPG AMEX | Bank of America Power Rewards | Merrill Plus | United Presidential Plus | Saks World Elite
Message 17 of 32
nothingman02
Valued Contributor

Re: Unifund is manipulating the way they report a CO from 2004


@Chopbrocoli wrote:

Credit card debt falls under accounts receivable because the creditors loaned the money/ service to the customer. Once they loan the money to the customer, they post the amount the customer charged into accounts receivable (an asset account). Also, when it comes to interest on the debt, they will post that into an interest receivable account. Now the creditor needs to reduce the accounts receivable account and convert it into cash... by doing that, they will collect by sending out monthly statements or for maxed out customers/ past due customers...call them 4-5 times a day. 

 

The credit card companies or banks have options when it comes to dealing with their "distressed receivables" (defaulted credit card debt/ loans). They can either perform inhouse collections, outsource them to a CA or they can "charge off" the bad debt receivables ... thus liquidating their bad debt receivables to a JDB (factor). The most common factoring companies are LVNV (Resurgent Capital), West Asset Mgt, Unifund, and etc who acquires distresses receivables from creditors such as GEMB, BoA, Citi, WFNNB, etc.. 

 

Factoring companies are not a collection agency. They are simply a company that purchases and manages distressed assets. However, they do have an option to establish their own call center and collect if they can save money and increase net income. But most of the time, a factor will outsource their receivables to a CA due to fixed, variable costs, labor, and time constraints.  There seems to be a lot of confusion when it comes to distinguishing between a CA and a Factor due to the ambiguous language that our awesome government has put out as well as misinformed consumers. The only true way to find out is for the federal judge to interpret the laws and hopefully the financial language. Hope that helps! 

Message Edited by Chopbrocoli on 07-17-2009 06:15 PM

Incorrect information.

 

A factoring company (FC) and a Junk debt buyer (JDB) are always two different animals. A company can be both a FC and JDB such as Asset Acceptance for instance. That does not mean that the debt could be construed as either type. 

 

Lets look at a few important differences.

 

1) Although its inconsequential to us, lets understand that a FC typically buys debts at 90% of their value. A JDB would at say 10%. Sometimes maybe upto 30% or sometimes even 1-2%. Depends on lot of factors.

2) A FC does not buy distressed accounts.

A FC buys good accounts from a distressed company and a JDB buys distressed accounts from a good company. This is where the fact that a debt is a CO or not is important. Also, a company does not have the need to sell a current and a good debt to a JDB.

3) FCs provide quick cash to distressed companies and do check the accounts they are buying. They oten check with the consumers as well. They would also check with the consumers the status of the accounts. They usually buy good accounts individually. A JDB would buy bad accounts in bulk. Sometimes, the original company buys back the accounts from the FC as well.

 

This is not to say that the FC cannot buy a bad debt. But they usually do not. Theres no need for them to do so unless they believe strongly, and rather strongly at that, that they would get paid in full by the consumer.  If the account is CO, then almost certainly, a FC would take a pass.

 

So essentially, by listing a CO as a factored account, a JDB, notwithstanding the fact that they could be a FC as well, are in violation for misrepresentation of the debt. They have to list a bad debt in collection as a bad debt. Period. They could get away with the CRA, BBB etc but there is no way they could prove in court that the debt was a factored account. In this context, they would also be in violation for listing themselves as a FC even if they are one. 

 

Message 18 of 32
nothingman02
Valued Contributor

Re: Unifund is manipulating the way they report a CO from 2004


@Anonymous wrote:
Yes, thank you, it does help me understand the difference between a CA and a Factoring Company.  So it means that Unifund is technically not a CA which is why they are listed as "other accounts" on my CR and my CR says I have 0 collections on my report.  I guess what I need to know is what is the best way to get them off my CR all together.  I already disputed with the CRA's which only TU deleted them from their records, so now they only appear on my EQ and EX CR's.  I DV'd them and all they sent me was some billing statements from Chase, none from the OC which was Heritage First USA before they were bought out by Chase.  They will not, or can not send any other proof because they don't have it, they haven't sent me an application or contract signed by me that proves that this account belongs to me.  Even though this is a legitimate debt with the OC, I do not agree with the amount Unifund says I owe because it is more than $2000.00 than I originally owed.  So, what is best?  PFD for a % of the total? Or just let it lie until the 7.5 yrs is up.  The SOL date has already passed so I am not obligated to give them anything, but I refuse to pay them what they are saying I owe when they won't, or can't send me supporting evidence that I owe them what they say.  If I did choose to PFD with them, just to get them off my CR, which would totally clean up my CR's, how much should I offer? 

CHASE is your OC.

 

Providing a signed application form is not validation. They have to obtaine, from the OC, verification of the debt and thus in effect, the balance they are claiming. Not the ownership or some random statement.  Make sure you can back up your SOL defense.

Message 19 of 32
Chopbrocoli
Established Contributor

Re: Unifund is manipulating the way they report a CO from 2004


@nothingman02 wrote:



Incorrect information.

 

A factoring company (FC) and a Junk debt buyer (JDB) are always two different animals. A company can be both a FC and JDB such as Asset Acceptance for instance. That does not mean that the debt could be construed as either type. 

 

Lets look at a few important differences.

 

1) Although its inconsequential to us, lets understand that a FC typically buys debts at 90% of their value. A JDB would at say 10%. Sometimes maybe upto 30% or sometimes even 1-2%. Depends on lot of factors.

2) A FC does not buy distressed accounts.

A FC buys good accounts from a distressed company and a JDB buys distressed accounts from a good company. This is where the fact that a debt is a CO or not is important. Also, a company does not have the need to sell a current and a good debt to a JDB.

3) FCs provide quick cash to distressed companies and do check the accounts they are buying. They oten check with the consumers as well. They would also check with the consumers the status of the accounts. They usually buy good accounts individually. A JDB would buy bad accounts in bulk. Sometimes, the original company buys back the accounts from the FC as well.

 

This is not to say that the FC cannot buy a bad debt. But they usually do not. Theres no need for them to do so unless they believe strongly, and rather strongly at that, that they would get paid in full by the consumer.  If the account is CO, then almost certainly, a FC would take a pass.

 

So essentially, by listing a CO as a factored account, a JDB, notwithstanding the fact that they could be a FC as well, are in violation for misrepresentation of the debt. They have to list a bad debt in collection as a bad debt. Period. They could get away with the CRA, BBB etc but there is no way they could prove in court that the debt was a factored account. In this context, they would also be in violation for listing themselves as a FC even if they are one. 

 


I honestly don't see a difference between a JDB and a factor. A factor can purchase good accounts receivable or bad accounts receivable. If factors could ONLY purchase good accounts receivable, then why would the business/ creditor sell their accounts receivable in the first place when they know they are already collecting cash from their customer? But I do understand that some business are strapped for cash, therefore one of their most commons assets they can sell immediately is their accounts receivable asset. The fact is a factor is someone who purchases "accounts receivable" at a discount, in exchange for immediate liquid assets (cash). Example: LVNV (Resurgent Capital) purchases accounts receivable directly from Citi, GEMB, etc. for like pennies on the dollar. 

Message Edited by Chopbrocoli on 07-19-2009 04:33 PM
AMEX Gold Premier Rewards | SPG AMEX | Bank of America Power Rewards | Merrill Plus | United Presidential Plus | Saks World Elite
Message 20 of 32
Advertiser Disclosure: The offers that appear on this site are from third party advertisers from whom FICO receives compensation.