Okay I need help sending the big blast after Midland!

[diabla]

They are pursuing me for a debt that was discharged in BK7 back in 2006/2007.  I had my BK atty send them a C&D letter on 10/12 but I can't call him until tomorrow to confirm when that letter was mailed.  However, Midland just updated on my CR on 10/17:

Now it says:

Type of Account: Open  (I can't see what it said before but I'm pretty sure it wasn't Open)

Date Opened: 9/9/2010 

Date Major Delinquency First Reported: 10/2010

Date of First Delinquency: 12/2006 (doesn't this contradict the previous?)

The only thing I think is that EQ changed it to say Consumer disputes - reinvestigation in program; Consumer disputes this account information

Could it be that EQ updated with the dispute info on 10/17, and not Midland?

Maybe I'll calm down until I talk to my atty....

[fuzzybean]

---

@diabla wrote:

They are pursuing me for a debt that was discharged in BK7 back in 2006/2007.  I had my BK atty send them a C&D letter on 10/12 but I can't call him until tomorrow to confirm when that letter was mailed.  However, Midland just updated on my CR on 10/17:

Now it says:

Type of Account: Open  (I can't see what it said before but I'm pretty sure it wasn't Open)

Date Opened: 9/9/2010 

Date Major Delinquency First Reported: 10/2010

Date of First Delinquency: 12/2006 (doesn't this contradict the previous?)

The only thing I think is that EQ changed it to say Consumer disputes - reinvestigation in program; Consumer disputes this account information

Could it be that EQ updated with the dispute info on 10/17, and not Midland?

Maybe I'll calm down until I talk to my atty....

---

Are you 100% sure the account wasn't sold PRIOR to the BK?  I had 2 accounts IIB that were in fact sold before we filed and I had no idea.  You can call the original creditor and ask them when it was sold to the CA?  If you speak nicely with them, they'll be nice back.  Kill them with kindness!  I was able to get both of the accounts completely wiped from my CR! 

[diabla]

Thanks, fuzzy.  I actually called Verizon and verified that the account was noted as being in BK in 11/2006 but I did not ask when it was sold to Midland, that's a good point.  But even so, once they were/are notifed that the account has been discharged, aren't they supposed to stop collection?

[fuzzybean]

---

@diabla wrote:

Thanks, fuzzy.  I actually called Verizon and verified that the account was noted as being in BK in 11/2006 but I did not ask when it was sold to Midland, that's a good point.  But even so, once they were/are notifed that the account has been discharged, aren't they supposed to stop collection?

---

No, once it's sold they are free to report it as it was when the sold it.  Mine we're both reporting under negative accounts.  One stated it was IIB, but they were still allowed to report the lates, etc.  I would find out when and then GW them.

[diabla]

Thats crazy (not you, fuzzy, lol, that flaw in the system).

Only thing though, I'm thinking back to when I filed, I'm pretty sure if it had been sold - or at least, if I had been notified by a CA, then I would have filed the claim against the CA and not Verizon.  I think.  Not sure.  It's been 6 years but I do see on my BK where it lists the original creditor AND CA in a lot of cases, so I think I would have listed Verizon as well as Midland.

I know I'm only making assumptions because I'm antsy until I can verify everything, but since they put the last date of delinquency as 12/2006, and I filed in 11/2006, then that "probably" means they got it around 12/2006 or later.....probably.  Most companies don't send it to collections as soon as it goes delinquent.  If indeed it went delinquent in 12/2006 (which I doubt, since I had already included it in my 11/2006 filing, it probably went delinquent months before that) then they probably got it a couple months later.  Esp since Verizon even knew about the BK.  Very strange.  Why would Verizon even give it to them if they knew it had been BK'd?

Thanks for your input, fuzzy!

[fuzzybean]

---

@diabla wrote:

Thats crazy (not you, fuzzy, lol, that flaw in the system).

Only thing though, I'm thinking back to when I filed, I'm pretty sure if it had been sold - or at least, if I had been notified by a CA, then I would have filed the claim against the CA and not Verizon.  I think.  Not sure.  It's been 6 years but I do see on my BK where it lists the original creditor AND CA in a lot of cases, so I think I would have listed Verizon as well as Midland.

I know I'm only making assumptions because I'm antsy until I can verify everything, but since they put the last date of delinquency as 12/2006, and I filed in 11/2006, then that "probably" means they got it around 12/2006 or later.....probably.  Most companies don't send it to collections as soon as it goes delinquent.  If indeed it went delinquent in 12/2006 (which I doubt, since I had already included it in my 11/2006 filing, it probably went delinquent months before that) then they probably got it a couple months later.  Esp since Verizon even knew about the BK.  Very strange.  Why would Verizon even give it to them if they knew it had been BK'd?

Thanks for your input, fuzzy!

---

It is possible that they sold it during or after BK, too...though they shouldn't.  I would just find out when it was sold and then try to GW and go from there.  Feel free to PM me if you need more help.

[diabla]

Well today I found out that my lawyer hasn't even sent my doggone letter out yet.     No wonder Midland is still acting the fool.  It's been two whole weeks, I thought for certain they were served and I'm here waiting for it to drop off my reports.

He promises it will go out this week, but I think I'll fire one off myself tonight, see which one gets there first.  I've already paid him but I don't want to wait any longer.  They might just delete from my letter.  How annoying!

[diabla]

An update - Midland updated my report to show IIB 12/2006.  Is this better?  My score dropped only one point (FAKO) even though its probably the BK that dropped it.  I would think that moving an account from "in collection" to a 6 year old BK would have helped rather than hurt.

Are they allowed to report like this?  Because they are not the OC and I didn't include them in my BK, I included the account that they bought in my BK.  I'm looking at all of my BK items and they are all listed under the OC, not the CA.

I"m wondering if I should be satisfied with this or dispute again.  This would put it past SOL 12/2012, plus IIB, but it would still stay on my report another year.

[Shogun]

I'm sure they're listed in the OC area because they are listing themselves as a Factoring Company.  They  use a code that glitches it this way so they can post as an OC rathter than a CA.  It allows them to put in lates, list it as open, etc.    It's a loophole that the CAs have found and have been putting it to good use.  With sending a C and D letter, you've pretty much tied their hands.  It will probably stay on your report as there will be no more contact with them. 

[diabla]

Thanks, Shogun.  What if I dispute it as Not Mine, since I have never had an account with Midland?  Is there any FDCPA violation that I can quote to them?