What does this mean??

[bmblbg]

I have been going rounds with HSBC on an old credit card.  I KNOW I paid it off before the alleged charge-off date, they have it as a charge off, and sold to Portfolio Recovery. 

Then today, there was an update to the HSBC tradeline on my Transunion report.  The old reporting was:

Charged off as bad debt
Purchased by another lender

The new reporting is:

Payment after charge off/collection

So does this mean that they're now agreeing that it's been paid off, just arguing with me over whether it was before or after the charge-off? 

Also- if this is what they're saying, then how the heck do I get Portfolio Recovery off my tail?? 

Sorry if I ramble in my confusion.... 

[annielorie]

How old? what was the DOFD? Do you have copies with the DOFD of yyour report? Do you have prood of payment? Check Card?? Did you pay the original creditor?

[bmblbg]

---

@annielorie wrote:

How old? what was the DOFD? Do you have copies with the DOFD of yyour report? Do you have prood of payment? Check Card?? Did you pay the original creditor?

---

Ugh!! Sorry!  The update was to the HSBC tradeline, not the Portfolio.  HSBC is alleging charge-off in 2009, and since I moved I lost the money order documents from back then   So then today they updated it to showing paid after charge-off.  This is still wrong, but at least they are showing that it's been paid!! (I think??) 

[guiness56]

---

@bmblbg wrote:

I have been going rounds with HSBC on an old credit card.  I KNOW I paid it off before the alleged charge-off date, they have it as a charge off, and sold to Portfolio Recovery.  Then today, there was an update to my Transunion report.  The old reporting was:

Charged off as bad debt
Purchased by another lender

The new reporting is:

Payment after charge off/collection

So does this mean that they're now agreeing that it's been paid off, just arguing with me over whether it was before or after the charge-off? 

Also- if this is what they're saying, then how the heck do I get Portfolio Recovery off my tail?? 

Sorry if I ramble in my confusion.... 

---

Yes, they are saying it was paid after CO.  They should also recall the debt from the CA as it was already paid before the CA got it.

I would send the OC a direct dispute under the FCRA.  They have to respond and correct any errors they may have made.

[annielorie]

+1 Listen I say this all the time its extremely old school.  Go to staple and get two binders. One for credit reports and collection stuff. make tabs file everything. Save for the rest of your life!  Binder # 2 include all utility mortgage cc loans . Keep this for life. ZOmbie debt collectors make us have to do this. I know in your new house you have room for two binders.  Contact the atty or OC of Judgement. DO NOT REPEAT DO NOT SSAY you are trying to by a home!!!!! Explain that you are trying to satisfy debt ask for complete removal of judgement. That means that they vacate the motion.  Wait 3 months or more for house. 2 reasons even if interest rates go up itll be slight until may 2013 and even if house prices go up Which they usually dont in feb march april not till school closes and more buyers are out. You will stay reap more benefits from holding off a bit. The amount you will =save over course of loan will be substantial. YOUr score should move significantly is you can get it vacated. What is your score and credit profile?

[RobertEG]

You can always send a direct dispute, but it most likely will not provide the resollution you seek without also bringing civil action.

I agree that if the debt was paid prior to a charge-off, then they had no delinquent debt on their books to charge-off.

Additionally, if no debt at the time of their collection referral, then the collection would also become moot.

If they did a charge-off, they almost assuredly included that in their next tax filing, and recouped a tax writeoff for the bad debt.  So if they aquiesce in agreement that the charge-off was improper, they would have an obligation to correct their filings with the IRS.  Ergo, their apparent reluctance to acquiesce..

In response to a dispute, they are required to conduct a reasonable investigation and truthfully state based on those results that they verify the accuracy, or correct or delete the inaccurate reporting.  The dispute process does not compel them to provide documentation to support their verification.  But it is a representation that they have investigated and found it accurate.

To compel them to produce their documentation of date of payment vs date of charge-off, which is the crux of the matter, you can bring civil action, and get it before a court, where the legal discovery process will compel them to provide you that documentation.  If their documentation supports your position, they will have a double problem.  They will lose the civil action, and additionally subject themselves to an addiitional charge on your part that they knowingly violated the FCRA by making false verification.

In summary, I would definately send a direct dispute.  They might choose to verify, but at increased peril should their records show payment prior to charge-off or collection referral.  If that is the case, they would be smart to dodge the issue by simply deleting the CO, and instructing the debt collector that the collection referral was erroneous, and should not be reported.

[guiness56]

If the debt has been paid, who could sue?

[Shogun]

I agree, they couldn't sue if the debt was paid.  I believe the OP's biggest complaint is that it was sent to a CA after she had already paid the OC.  Since the bill was paid, there shouldn't be a debt.  

[RobertEG]

Suit, not based on the paid status of the debt per se, but rather based on violation of the FCRA  by

1. reporting a charge-off and making a collection referral that had no basis in fact; and

2. verifying the accuracy of that reporting when their reasonable investigation did not support verification.

[guiness56]

Sorry Robert.

I took it as the OP getting sued, not the one bringing suit.