The million dollar question

[Anonymous]

Ok, so I have been rolling this around in my mind and looking for opinions on line including this forum (the best out there). So here it is. If you pay a derog in full BEFORE disputing WITHOUT asking for PFD or anything else and THEN disputing is it more likely to be successful? Seems to me the collector would be less likely to investigate said debt or validate the account because they have what they want, MONEY and would be less inclined to waste man hours and resources on the paid account. Thoughts?

[Anonymous]

What you are saying makes sense but, from what I have read on the forums, your arugement actually works the other way.  The CA already has what they want, your money, so they have no reason whatsoever to help you out by removing items from your reports. Offering a PFD is kind of like a bribe -- I'll only pay you IF you agree to delete.  Once they have their payment, they have no motivation to help after that.    Most of them are bottom feeders anyway so it takes some real luck to get any of them to agree to a PFD,  Getting them to agree to delete after payment would most likley take a full on miracle.  That's just my opinion, maybe others have had success with paying in full first.  

[RobertEG]

The burning question is..... what are you disputing?

A dispute must identify some inaccuracy in their credit reporting.

if you pay the debt, the requirment is that they update their reporting to show paid, $0.

What will you, after paying the debt, use a a basis for assertion that their reporting is inaccurate?

If you simply dispute with no clear assertion of what is inaccurate, then there is no requirment for any investigation.  The dispute can be dismissed as frivoloous or irrelevant.

[Anonymous]

I understand that disputing accurate information is in itself, not really ethical. My question was purely theoretical. If a validation letter was sent on an accurate report would they be less inclined to act on a verification? Would they be less motivated if they already have what they want. Just a thought.

[RobertEG]

Are you referrng to a debt validation letter as opposed to a dispute under the FDCPA?

If so,, a DV request under the FDCPA imposes no requirment to respond.  There is no requried validation or verification period.

Thus, it would be ignored with no consequence.

It does not even impose a cease collection bar unless sent within 30 days of dunning notice.

Even if a DV were timely, since the debt collector has already terminated collection on the debt since it is paid, a cease collection bar would be meaningless.

[Anonymous]

I guess I need to understand the difference between validation and dispute. I was refering to disputing the account.

[Anonymous]

I think the OP is suggesting that one could pay a collection account in full. Then, a month or two later, dispute the collection trade line as inaccurate through the credit bureau. The credit bureau then would try and verify the info with the collection agency. The thought is, now that the collection agency has their money, they wouldn't waste time or man hours verifying information of an account that is no longer outstanding. Then the credit bureau  would then delete the collection off the credit report through the 30 day deadline of not being able to verify the tradeline from the creditor reporting it.

It wouldn't be my first tactic. My first tactic would be to call the original creditor and see if I could pay them off with the understanding, that they would retract the account from the collection agency.

Second approach would be to contact the collection agency and say, I will pay, if you remove the tradeline from all three CRA's. If they say no. Keep calling or writing until I get a yes. Ask to speak to a supervisor, whatever it takes. 

The strategy the OP is thinking about could be a third option. But it puts one in a week position. So wouldn't be a option for me. But I understand the concept.

Some here may question legally or morally wrong, however consider this. PFD is morally iffy as well, yet is touted in the forms all day long.

Another instance might be, the collection isn't yours, but through some mistake or procedural error on a creditors part it appears as a collection. It happens! I would rather pay 200 or 400 bucks for a PFD on a collection that legally shouldn't be on my report than getting a lawyer at twice the price to get removed.

Even if the lawyer was cheaper, there is a time factor to consider. So, depends on your goal as to which strategy is the right one for the individual.

Sorry if rambling off topic. Hope some of this helps.