09-07-2013 08:17 AM
I have an open collection for under $1000, for I.C. Systems, a utility bill. I am considering applying for a mortgage in about 6 months, and I am tired of seeing it on there. It is actually a few years old but I disputed with the CRA and they upheld and updated the date . I do not believe that I owe them as much as they say, but good luck winning the fight with a utility company. I am also not sure they ever sent me a collection notice, but as it is several years old, I can't be sure.
So, what would be the recommended course of action? DV (request validation)? PFD?
I am a little concerned because I managed to get it off my other two reports via dispute with the CRA, and managed to get another collection I didn't recognize removed as well that is with the same outfit also via dispute with the CRA, and am afraid of having new stuff pop up as a result of doing this. Right now it is only 1 collection on 1 CRA, and it is aged past 1 year also at this point even with the updated date, so I am also considering just leaving it alone unless the underwriters tell me to pay it.
09-07-2013 08:43 PM
You have to assume that your lender-to-be would require you to pay it. IMO, it's better to pursue it now vs. waiting and having to do it without a PFD due to timed contraints.
If I had that, I would DV now. If they don't respond then I would start PFDing a month out from now.
09-08-2013 06:38 AM
A DV is a powerful tool if used correctly. It would assure that they still own the debt.
09-08-2013 06:49 AM
It should also be noted that I disputed with the CRA and it was upheld. I don't remember what I did, I think it was paid. The original utility co is charging me for something I do not owe, but I cannot prove it. Would this affect a DV?
09-08-2013 06:53 AM
You state that you think it was paid, a DV would verify if it was paid or not. If not paid, try for a PFD, if paid, then GW.
09-08-2013 08:27 AM
When you either file a dispute or send a timely DV, the party is not required to prove the accuracy of the reporting or legitimacy of the debt as part of their verification.
They ae required to conduct a reasonable investigation, and make a reasonable determination based on the results of their investigation.
Neither process has a mechanism for handling evidence or resolving the inevitable differences of opinion over what it does or does not "prove."
A DV would, at this point, be untimely, and thus impose no cease collection bar on the debt collector.
They could choose to ignore it.
Even if they choose to respond, they will most likely verify, as they have already adddressed the issue of having conducted an investigation and conveying their determination to the consumer as part of the prior dispute process.
You can always send a DV, timely or not, but I doubt that it will resolve anything beyond the current status of their having investigated and found the debt to be legitimate.
09-08-2013 08:58 AM
Ya I do not think I want to DV, it is just going to open up a possible can of worms.
Has anyone had any success doing PFD with IC Systems? Honestly I can live with it staying on my report at this point, I just don't want it popping up on other reports, and aging as paid. If I can get it off though, of course that would be better. If I could settle for less, and get it marked as PIF, on the one CRA, I would be happy. It's a lot of money to throw at a BS charge.
myFICO is the consumer division of FICO. Since its introduction 20 years ago, the FICO® Score has become a global standard for measuring credit risk in the banking, mortgage, credit card, auto and retail industries. 90 of the top 100 largest U.S. financial institutions use the FICO Score to make consumer credit decisions.>> About myFICO