cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Is This Collection Practice Legal? Please Enlighten me!

tag
Anonymous
Not applicable

Is This Collection Practice Legal? Please Enlighten me!

Hello,

 

I lost my job 2 years ago and my credit went down the drain. I'm rebuilding and have a good score now. However there is a collection on my account from an energy and power company. I moved and requested my electricity turned off on a certain date. Well these lame-o's didn't turn the electricity off by my requested date. They turned it off a full month later, by then the new tenant had racked up about $120 in charges. I refused to pay because I moved out and requested it turned off on my moveout day and they're the ones that didn't. Anyway, this collection is from 2009, however the collection agency, continues to refresh the "date assigned" every six months so that it continues to looks as if it is a new collection. It's the same collection agency too. Actually the debt is charged off. I've disputed it and tried to get it fix but they refuse. So the collection agency that purchased this charged off debt refreshes the "date assigned" every six months and it continues to list as a "new collection" which we all know affects our credit score more than an old collection. Even though the debt was assigned to them in 2009, they know that by refreshing the date assigned they can keep banging my score in hopes that I'll pay the measly $120 and their tactic is working. I'm so tired of this collection "relisting" itself as a new collection every six months that I'm willing to just pay the $120 even though it's not my debt. Is it legal for them to misrepresent the "date assigned" date. For example they'll list it as "Date assigned January 2012" and then refresh to "Date assigned July 2012" to "Date assigned December 2012" etc, so that it looks as if it has been "newly" placed for collection which bangs my score hard. Is this legal? And if not, what can I do about it?

 

As far as I know, "Date Assigned" refers to the date it was assigned to the collection agency, which should actually say "May 2009" and that date only changes if the debt is then assigned to a different agency or bounces around to different agencies.

Message 1 of 17
16 REPLIES 16
ccnewcc
Established Contributor

Re: Is This Collection Practice Legal? Please Enlighten me!

AFAIK, changing the date assigned does nothing as far as hurting your Credit.

 

I think that the CA thinks that it does.  But I am almost sure that it does not.  And that is because, the date that matters is the date of first delinquency.

 

And not sure what date assigned is either.  I didn't know that CR have a date assigned category.  CRs have a date opened and a Date of last report.  

 

 

Anyways, if there is a date assigned category, i guess this could be reported correctly if this debt is bought and sold a million times and every 6 months is bought back.  Otherwise, it may be reported incorrectly.

 

But again, I assert that changing dates on the same account (or "updating") an account does no harm.  It is either a tactic to fool you, the credit consumer, into thinking that it hurts your credit, or that the CA just thinks that it hurts.

 

Again, idk, but I really think that it does not hurt.

 

Message 2 of 17
Anonymous
Not applicable

Re: Is This Collection Practice Legal? Please Enlighten me!

New collections affect my credit score. I refresh my score monthly and the myFICO calculator shows explicitly what's affecting my account. When I go under "negative items," on the MyFico score explanation, it says "You have a new collection reported which is negatively affecting your score." however it is not a new collection, it is merely made to look new by reaaging the "date assigned" category. When the CA updates the "Date assigned" it shows as a new collection and this brings my score down a few points each time they do it. The account is not bought and sold, it's the same CA. So my question remains, is it legal for the CA to update the date assigned category as if it was newly assigned to them when it wasn't?

Message 3 of 17
ccnewcc
Established Contributor

Re: Is This Collection Practice Legal? Please Enlighten me!

[wonders if myfico is calling "Date Opened" "Date Assigned".]

 

You need to look at your CRs directly from the CRA to have the best info..3rd party sites can sometimes jumble things.

 

 

Message 4 of 17
ccnewcc
Established Contributor

Re: Is This Collection Practice Legal? Please Enlighten me!

Also is this owned by the OC or by the CA?

 

You said it is CO.  So perhaps they OC is calling it back and then reassigning it..Probably as they renew contracts for collections.

 

 

The point I am getting at is that you may be worrying about nothing.

 

But you might want to check your CRs directly.

 

 

ETA:  So Is it illegal?  It depends.

 

Message 5 of 17
guiness56
Epic Contributor

Re: Is This Collection Practice Legal? Please Enlighten me!

The only date that would cause it to look new to the CRAs is the date reported.  That is the date it is acutally received by the CRA from the CA.  The date assigned is the date the CA was assigned/sold the debt from the OC.

Message 6 of 17
Anonymous
Not applicable

Re: Is This Collection Practice Legal? Please Enlighten me!

I looked directly at my Credit report from Transunion "date assigned" refers to the date the original creditor assigned the debt to a collection agency. Basically the collection agency keeps reporting it as if it is a "new collection" as if it was "newly assigned" by changing the "date assigned" date every 6 months. They are basically deleting the collection every six months and reporting it again as newly assigned. This does affect my credit report I've followed this closely. Each time a new collection is reported on my account my score drops. The original creditor charged it off so they are not "reassigning" it to this same agency and this same agency has not sold it to anyone else. Basically this agency bought the debt for pennies on dollar when it was charged off and they report it as a "newly assigned collection" when it isn't newly assigned. Does that makes sense? Basically every 6 six months it says "you have a new collection on your account" when it's not a new collection at all. And again, they are not buying and selling it, which yes would change the assignment date. I am not referring to "date open". Again, "Date Assigned" refers to the date that the original creditor assigned the debt to a collection agency to be collected. New collections affect your credit report. However this is NOT a new collection. The collection agency is being clever and merely making it look like I have a new collection every 6 months when I don't. Does that makes sense?

Message 7 of 17
Anonymous
Not applicable

Re: Is This Collection Practice Legal? Please Enlighten me!

Exactly this is what I'm saying. The credit agency receives this collection every 6 months as a "new" collection, when it's not new. I have 2 different credit monitoring services and I get emails anytime something changes on my credit report. Every six months I get an alert saying "A new collection has been reported on your report." I go to look at the report and it's the same collection, same collection agency, they just refresh the date as if it was "newly assigned" to them they delete the old item on my report. So it shows up as if I have an account that recently went into collections. They are basically reporting it as a new collection every 6 months. Is tihs legal? When a lender pulls my credit report it is a very different thing to see a collection reported in 2009 as opposed to a collection reported this month!!! The collection is from 4 years ago not this month, yet it appears "newly reported" every six months to make it look like I recently defaulted. The CA is doing this on purpose!

Message 8 of 17
guiness56
Epic Contributor

Re: Is This Collection Practice Legal? Please Enlighten me!

I understand what you are saying and I understand what the date assigned is used for.  "What I don't understand is how it is affecting your score. 

 

A debt can be assigned to a CA months and months before it is reported to the CRA.  The date reported is what would cause a score drop as a new collection.

 

Is the date reported being changed also?  Is anything else being changed?

 

 

Message 9 of 17
RobertEG
Legendary Contributor

Re: Is This Collection Practice Legal? Please Enlighten me!

It is just plain wrong, and stands on its own as a violation of the FCRA by knowingly reporting inaccurate information. 

It may affect scoring of the collection by FICO, as some do see a change in score based on the changing of such information, but one does not have to show damage in order to contest the accuracy of reporting, and consumers are not privy to the innards of the FICO scoring algorithm, so have no way to show actual damange.

Their only defense would be stupidity in not knowing from month to month the date they received business authority to collect on the debt.

 

While it may not arise in your specific case, their is a situation where misreporting can have a serious impact.  Debt collectors are required to report the DOFD on the OC acount to the CRA within 90 days of reporting their collection.  Under situations where they cannot obtain a DOFD from the OC, they are permitted under FCRA 623(a)(5) to report their date of collection referral as the DOFD.

 

 

Message 10 of 17
Advertiser Disclosure: The offers that appear on this site are from third party advertisers from whom FICO receives compensation.