@#$% LVNV!!

[NWintellectual]

Woke up to an SW alert this morning and wouldn't you know it, LVNV decided to throw the dispute flag on me. They are my last baddie (from an old CreditOne CO, DOFD 10/2008). I had sent them a 623 dispute last week regarding their reporting of a "past due" balance and the fact they are reporting as a "factoring company". So I guess that the dispute label is somewhat justified, but it ticks me off that they would do this. Then again, I would expect nothing less from these A+ scumbags (same class as Midland and Portfolio).

I have an appointment for Tuesday at my local CU to apply for an unsecured card. The LO was working personally with me under manual review to try and push my app through because a lot of my deletions and settlements haven't posted yet. But I'm really worried they won't be able to approve with a dispute flag on this account.

I'm willing to settle with them but not based on their balance of $1200 (the original card was a $200 CL). I'm not even worried about deletion since they've been updating monthy since the dawn of time, so what's another update going to do to my score. Anyone have any good emails for LVNV that can get me inside?

[gdale6]

Why would you even app for a card until all has updated to the CRAs is beyond me..... one would want to present to a creditor their best profile......  A dispute flag I doubt will have any impact on an app for an unsecured CC it affects mortgage apps...

[SunriseEarth]

I don't get this either.  You disputed something and you're upset because they marked you as having disputed something?

I settled with LVNV a few years back (I think I paid $400 to settle an $815 balance).  I learned about GWs when I joined this forum in the summer.  It took about 4 months of GW letters to do it, but they deleted.   I honestly think settling and GWing is a better approach than trying to get this removed on some technicality.  And I'd also agree that it would have been preferable to wait until your CRs were updated before apping.   But what's done is done and it's best to pursue your CC app with the LO.  Good luck. 

[NWintellectual]

---

@SunriseEarth wrote:

I don't get this either.  You disputed something and you're upset because they marked you as having disputed something?

I settled with LVNV a few years back (I think I paid $400 to settle an $815 balance).  I learned about GWs when I joined this forum in the summer.  It took about 4 months of GW letters to do it, but they deleted.   I honestly think settling and GWing is a better approach than trying to get this removed on some technicality.  And I'd also agree that it would have been preferable to wait until your CRs were updated before apping.   But what's done is done and it's best to pursue your CC app with the LO.  Good luck. 

---

Perhaps I got carried away. I was under the impression that a "dispute" flag could only be triggered when you file the dispute with the CRAs. I thought that the 623 process would not trigger such a remark.

[SunriseEarth]

---

@NWintellectual wrote:

---

@SunriseEarth wrote:

I don't get this either.  You disputed something and you're upset because they marked you as having disputed something?

I settled with LVNV a few years back (I think I paid $400 to settle an $815 balance).  I learned about GWs when I joined this forum in the summer.  It took about 4 months of GW letters to do it, but they deleted.   I honestly think settling and GWing is a better approach than trying to get this removed on some technicality.  And I'd also agree that it would have been preferable to wait until your CRs were updated before apping.   But what's done is done and it's best to pursue your CC app with the LO.  Good luck. 

---

Perhaps I got carried away. I was under the impression that a "dispute" flag could only be triggered when you file the dispute with the CRAs. I thought that the 623 process would not trigger such a remark.

---

It's accurate for them to report it as "disputed."  However, I agree that the "factoring company" reporting is misleading, and there has been a lot of success with people dealing with the BBB and LVNV for this reason. 

When dealing with the LO, I think the issue of the collection itselt is probably more of an issue than the disputed status.   And you can explain that, just as readily as you have here, if it's questioned.