Factoring Company for PRA and Midland

[Anonymous]

A new credit report was pulled from all 3 bureaus.  Midland who I disputed last month now is showing two 90+days late payments.

First pull at the end of feb. no lates now two!

Both PRA and Midland are under factoring company on the credit report.  PRA account is also a judgement.  Which that is a long story.

What exactly does it mean when it says "Factoring Company"  

Thanks! 

[RobertEG]

Creditors have assets called "accounts receivable" which represent money due to them by customers that has not yet been collected, as opposed to real property owned, cash, and other monetary assets.

Some companies may have an immediate need for cash, and will offer to sell their accounts receivable to another at a discount below its monetary value, thus converting their accounts receivalbe into immediate cash without the wait for consumer payments.  The purchaser of those receivables is callled a "factor."

A traditional factoring company deals only in accounts that are in good-standing, not delinquent accounts.  They are not high-risk investors.

Debt collectors, on the other hand, buy debt thst is currently delinquent.

There is some overlap and controvery over whehter a company that deals primarily in purchase of delinquent (bad) debt is actually a factorng company.

There is no statutory phobhibition that I am aware that precldes a company from referring to its purchase of delinquent debt as "factoring."

Some literature, however, will assert that it is not factoring.

A lot of controversy over very little in my opinion.  They can call themselves a duck if they wish.

[Anonymous]

Thanks Robert!

So the account being listed under a factoring company would that allow Midland to show to 90+ day late payments?

I know a collection account is not allowed to show late payments.  

Is it worth trying to get them to correct?

[kennerchick]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Thanks Robert!

So the account being listed under a factoring company would that allow Midland to show to 90+ day late payments?

I know a collection account is not allowed to show late payments.  

Is it worth trying to get them to correct?

---

http://rebuildcreditscores.com/how-to-dispute-collection-accounts/

Midland and PRA are Junk Debt Buyers
http://www.creditinfocenter.com/debt/jdbs.shtml

Found the below info here https://creditboards.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=361099

To characterize your CO or CA account as a factored acct or to characterize the CA/JDB as a factoring company is false representation. By claiming to be a factoring company, they are alleging that they purchased the debt when it was not in default, meaning they were an innocent purchaser. Factoring companies purchase receiveables, not debt, and the bulk of the accounts are commercial, not consumer.
Violations

For a JDB to state that it is a factoring company violates:

1692e(12) The false representation or implication that accounts have been turned over to innocent purchasers for value. JDBs are not innocent purchasers and not holders.

1692e(10) The use of any false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect any debt or to obtain information concerning a consumer. The operand in this sentence is ANY. Any false statement. Any misleading statement. Any misrepresentation. A contradiction is inherently false or misleading and/or a misrepresentation. That is the thrust of the overshadowing case law. 1692g( says you have 30 days to request verificaiton or a copy of a judgment, therefore to state that you must "pay now" or "pay immediately" or "remit payment within 5 days", "pay this debt within 10 days" or "send a check within 30 days" contradicts 1692g( and a contradiction is inherently false (did I already say that?)

1692e(8) Communicating or threatening to communicate to any person credit information which is known or which should be known to be false. A JDB knows or should know that it is not an innocent purchaser and that it is not a holder.

1692e(6)(A) The false representation or implication that a sale, referral, or other transfer of any interest in a debt shall cause the consumer to lose any claim or defense to payment of the debt. A JDB currently has a class action against them because in their affidavits attached to the complaint they claimed to be a "holder in due course." They are neither a "holder in due course" (abolished by US Congress in 1979) nor are they a "holder" under state laws. They misrepresented the rights and remedies of the consumer and misled the judge as to the true nature of their relationship with the consumer. A judge, believing that the debt collector is a holder, would accept the affidavit as prima facie evidence of indebtedness, rather than what it truly is: Hearsay.

1692e(5) The threat to take any action that cannot legally be taken or that is not intended to be taken. A non-holder cannot legally sue as a holder.

1692e(2)(A) The false representation of the character any debt. The debt has been characterized as one that was not in default at the time of purchase.

1692e(2)(A) The false representation of the legal status of any debt. Reporting as a factoring company confers the legal stauts of holder upon the furnisher.

16922f   A debt collector may not use unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect any debt. The use of factoring company is unfair as it deprives the consumer of rights, remedies and defenses and provides a false impression to current and potential lenders.

[RobertEG]

I would take all of those assertions and conclusions that it is knowingly false reporting with a grain of sand.

That is opinion, not supporte by any statutory case law of which I am aware.

Correction, even if successful, would only extend to deletion of that reporting, and would not require deletion of their collection.

It would be a victory of little substance.

It is not an issue I would advise pursuing unless you wish to take to court and develop case law for the rest of us.......