Will CRA Delete This??

[TimeOnMySide]

The CA is listing the Original Lender as another collection agency, not the OC.  I have sent the CA 2 DV letters with no response.  SO, if I dispute the original lender that is listed by the CA will the account get deleted?  Also for my EX report they're listing the wrong DOFD.  I'm getting tired of them and want this to go away. 

Thanks in advance.

[RobertEG]

You need to clearly identify who the parties are, and their affiliation with the OC.

The FDCPA defines and governs actions by parties collecting debt.  The FDCPA never uses the term "collection agency." 
That is not a legal term.

The FDCPA ues the term "debt collector," which is defined in FDCPA 803(6) as any person or entity that is attempting to secure payment of debt owed to another.

This includes a totally separate third party collection agency, but also includes any creditor who, in the process of collecting his own debts, uses the name of any party, including a wholly owned but separate collection subsidiary of the OC corporation. That is still a debt collector, even though it may superficially appear to be the OC.

The legal OC can never be a debt collector or a collection agency, and cannot report with that same corporate name as a debt collectore or CA  to your CR.

You cannot ever DV an OC, only a debt collector/CA.

Failure of a debt collector to respond to a DV letter is never grounds for requesting the CRA to delete.  DV letters are under the FDCPA, and deal with debt collection practices between you and the debt collector.  There is no requriement under FDCPA 809 that a debt collector ever respond to a DV letter.  The CRAs are not a party to this process.

As for listing the incorrect DOFD, I would ignore this for now.  DOFD only has any relevance once you feel that 7 1/2 years has expired.  Until then, it has no credit reporting of scoring relevance.

[MarineVietVet]

---

@RobertEG wrote:

You need to clearly identify who the parties are, and their affiliation with the OC.

The FDCPA defines and governs actions by parties collecting debt.  The FDCPA never uses the term "collection agency." 
That is not a legal term.

The FDCPA ues the term "debt collector," which is defined in FDCPA 803(6) as any person or entity that is attempting to secure payment of debt owed to another.

This includes a totally separate third party collection agency, but also includes any creditor who, in the process of collecting his own debts, uses the name of any party, including a wholly owned but separate collection subsidiary of the OC corporation. That is still a debt collector, even though it may superficially appear to be the OC.

The legal OC can never be a debt collector or a collection agency, and cannot report as such to your CR.

You cannot ever DV an OC, only a debt collector/CA.

Failure of a debt collector to respond to a DV letter is never grounds for requesting the CRA to delete.  DV letters are under the FDCPA, and deal with debt collection practices between you and the debt collector.  There is no requriement under FDCPA 809 that a debt collector ever respond to a DV letter.  The CRAs are not a party to this process.

As for listing the incorrect DOFD, I would ignore this for now.  DOFD only has any relevance once you feel that 7 1/2 years has expired.  Until then, it has no credit reporting of scoring relevance.

---

This is true but the great state of Texas requires that a creditor respond to a DV letter within 30 days, no exceptions. 

Texas Finance Code

From a BK years ago to:

9/09 EX pulled by lender 802
3/10 EQ- 800
4/10 TU -772

You can do the same thing with hard work

Credit Scoring 101
Common Abbreviations
Frequently Requested Threads
Credit Problems Which Is Worse?
Whats In Your FICO Score

[TimeOnMySide]

The CA account that is reporting is Portfolio Recovery.  For this acct they are listing Midland Credit as the OC. 

The reason I was interested in disputing the DOFD is they shouldn't be able to verify it since it's wrong and they must not even know who the correct OC is to obtain the real DOFD.  In that case, I was thinking the acct would get removed.