No credit card required
Browse credit cards from a variety of issuers to see if there's a better card for you.
You may note on the attachment to the letter dated September 27, 2012 that Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC identifies the Portfolio Type as “O” and the Account Type as “OC”. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC is a “debt purchaser” and we furnish these codes to the credit reporting agencies in accordance with the Consumer Data Industry Association’s Credit Reporting Resource Guide’s requirements with respect to “debt purchasers”, i.e, an account owned by a “debt purchaser” is to furnish the code “O” in the “Portfolio Type” field and furnish the code “OC” in the “Account Type” field. Under those same guidelines, the credit reporting agencies may interpret the “O” code as “Open” and the “OC” code as “Debt Purchaser” or as a “Factoring Company.”
Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC is responsible for the information we furnish to credit reporting agencies, but is not responsible for information furnished by another creditor, such as has HSBC Bank Nevada, and is not responsible for the information reported by consumer reporting agencies, such as TransUnion.
Ok.. try this one. They had re-aged the DOFD so that it falls off 4 years later than the original OC. That's what I called them on, plus them listed as open and as the OC on an account. They are a CA, plain and simple. What's your opinion?
....bottom feeders adapt?
Another guideline broken, and the "oversight comittee" will get numerous complaints, but kickbacks will win out???
Still debating what to do with this one.
If it were me, and I had proof of re-aging, I'd contact an attorney.
Debt collector reporting is required, under the CRA reporting manual (their referenced "Credit Reporting Resource Guide"), to separatly provide, in field code 2 of the K-segment of their reporting, the name of the original creditor. Thus, their reporting must establish that they are NOT the OC.
Account Type is reported under field code 9 of the base segment, and OC accounts have entirely different reporting codes than debt collector "accounts."
No one other than the Original Creditor can report as such. A debt purchaser, if the debt was delinquent at time of purchase, becomes a debt collector subject to all provisions of the FDCPA, and is not a creditor, let alone an OC.
They are blowing interpretational smoke, expecting a CRA to intepret their misleading reporting as an OC as actually being reporting by a debt collector.
Pushing the responsibility for misleading reporting over to the CRA to "interpret" otherwise.
Nonsense.