10-09-2008 10:11 AM
10-09-2008 10:53 AM
10-09-2008 01:47 PM
Wow! They sure are forward thinking.
I personally wouldn't file complaints. Not now anyway. Filing complaints won't make them go away, usually. I personally would focus on removing the CA, rather than the lates. If I had to go after them because of the lates, then maybe I would scour the FCRA to see if I could catch them on a reporting gaff. If they remove the lates now, then there is nothing stopping them from adding lates next month and the month after. If they do go away, it'll likely end up with another CA.
10-09-2008 10:12 PM
llecs is right, and in general a bad check is not perceived very well, it has a long SOL and you don't want to stroke them the wrong way.
I would focus on PFD.
10-10-2008 01:20 AM - edited 10-10-2008 01:25 AM
Clearly, holding you to delinquencies that have not yet legally occured is stupid, and must clearly be a computer snaffu, which is what they will tell you.
FTC complaints are the last resort under the FCRA. You have to have your ducks in a row before you do this. I would not take it to that level until I was sure there was a clear and documented FCRA abuse.
The OC can continue to post later account delinquencies until such time as they close, CO, or CA the account. So more info is needed on the precise account status.
YOu can get that info, before going FTC ballistic, by filing a dispute under section 611(a) of the FCRA with the CRA, and requrie them to investigate this for you.
I agree totally with the advice of llecs and demed. Find out the CA role in all of this first. Get the facts together.