Is it best to PIF a CO, then GW for deletion instead of PFD?

[money_talks]

It seems to me that whenever you request a PFD, the creditor is very likely to decline because they fear they might get in trouble. On the very basic level, you are giving money to the creditor and if they accept the money, they agree to delete the TL. I understand there is a credit reporting manual that states this is not the way to do things and not a good business practice, but most credtiors you talk to are unaware of this manual.

Wouldn't I have a better chance of PIF, then GW the creditor for deletion? It just feels like once it is PIF and you goodwill, if the creditor agrees to deletion, it is a more "legal" goodwill. I don't know if that's the word, but simply there is no money being exchanged at that point. Whatever the creditor decides to do is out of the bottom of their heart.

My situation is I have a CO and I have sent a PFD. Creditor denied the deletion. If I keep sending PFD's hoping they land on the right person's desk or they get tired of you (which I doubt, they won't get tired, they might simply ignore your PDF letters after a while), it might take forever. Maybe I should just PIF and start the GW letters.

Thoughts?

[guiness56]

The creditors are referring to the FCRA as far as it not being legal.

CAs have an agreement with the CRAs not to delete for payment. 

If a creditor has an account with the CRAs they know about the credit reporting manual.  They have to.  It tells them what codes and so forth to put on the Metro 2 UDF.  It may be that only certain departments have the manual though.

Some get tired of PFD denials and will just PIF then GW.  Either way, in one way or the other, you paid the account to get it deleted.

[money_talks]

guiness: Yes, I meant that it seems almost all first tier CSR do not know there exists such a manual betwen them as the credtior and the CRAs. So you are probably right that maybe only specific people in the creditor's organization are aware and trained on the manual.

"Either way, in one way or the other, you paid the account to get it deleted"

Are you saying that if the creditor agrees to delete the TL in exchange for payment, does this agreement (between you and the credtior) supersede the CRA manual guidelines? If the creditor later changes their mind and you have the agreement in writing, who would win in court if it got to that point?

Basically, if the credtior agreed to delete your TL for payment but was unaware of the CRA manual guidelines. Then later they find out the manual says this should not be done and do not delete the TL based on this, who would win in court?

[guiness56]

What I meant was you either do a PFD or PIF then a GW.  Either way you have paid the debt to get it deleted.

It is an agreement between the CRAs and the creditor not to delete solely based on payment.  This is understandable as that is how the CRAs make money.

However, a creditor can delete a TL for whatever reason they want to and do not have to give a reason for the deletion to the CRAs.

Honestly, I think you are over thinking the situation.  If a creditor says they will delete and it is in writing they are not going to change their minds.

The reporting guidelines are guidelines.