topic Re: HOLY MAJOLY!! READ THIS RESPONSE FROM PCS ATTORNEY!! NEED HELP in Rebuilding Your Credit

HOLY MAJOLY!! READ THIS RESPONSE FROM PCS ATTORNEY!! NEED HELP

Booner72 — Sun, 19 Feb 2012 21:42:30 GMT

As anyone knows whose been following me, that I've been fighting a CA for months to get paid medical collections off my reports. I sent them an Intent to sue based on HIPAA, reporting my husband's and telling them that they owe me 1000.00 for each account on each report, and blah blah. I said that they could stop hearing from me by simply deleting ALL ACCOUNTS. I also mentioned that the county judge vacated the judgment related to the accounts as she agreed w/ me that it was b.s.

Here is their reply from JOE SCHMOE 'Staff Attorney'

"Thank you for your most recent email to PCS dated 2/14/12. In your email, you state that you believe PCS has violated federal law with respect to your accounts. As we have explained in our previous communications with you, we do not agree with that conclusion. HOWEVER, we do agree that the best course of action in this case would be to simply remove these accounts from your credit report and resolve any of concerns that you may have.

As such, we are prepared to delete the accounts from your credit report and provide copies of those deletions to you ine exchange for a Mutual Release and Agreement, which is to be signed by both you and DH. I have enclosed the Mutual Release and Agreement, and I would appreciate it if you could review that document and sign and return it to PCS by 2/19/12. Please be advised that you should feel free to contact an attorney if you have any questions regarding that document. Upon receipt of the signed Mutual Release and Agreement, PCS will mail you copies of the deletions."

K so now is this legal document that I'm hoping you guys can read and let me know if I should sign. It seems to me that since they went to this much trouble, the obviously agree I could sue their Arses!!

RECITALS

1. PCS is the assigne of certain claims against BLAH BLAH BLAH accounts (Listed by OC's).

2. PCS sued The Booners in Court Case No XXX

3. The booners agreed to a stipulated judgment and covenant not to execute to avoid further litigation of this matter, and a judgment was entered in COURT case No XX on April 9, 2010.

4. On May 16, the Booners paid PCS in full for the balance owing on the Judgment on on May 17, PCS mailed a Satisfaction of Judgment to the Courts.

AGREEMENT

Based upon mutual consideration, the parties agree as follows:

1. RECITALS: The recitals herein above are conclusively deemed true.

2. CREDIT REPORTING: PCS agrees to delete the accounts assigned from its assignors, as listed above.

3. RELEASE BY THE BOONERS: The Booners and their heirs, assignors, executors, administrators, employees, agents, and assigns, do hereby release, quit, and discharge PCS and it's Assignors and their hears BLAH BLAH from an and all claims, actions, causes of action, demands, rights damage costs, loss expense, and compensation by the Booners may now have, or may have in the future, of any kind, relating to the indebtedness in the lawsuit described in Recital Paragraphs 1-4.

4. RELEASE BY PCS: PCS and their hers blah blah, quit and discharge the Booners, and their BLAH BLAH from any and all claims, actions, causes of action, demands rights, damage costs, loss, expense, and compensation whatsoever, PCS may now have, of any kind, relating to the indebtedness in the lawsuit described in Recital Paragraph 1-4 herin above.

6. (SKIPPED 5) ATTORNEY FEES: If any suit action or other proceeding shall be instituted relating to any term or condition of this agreement or relating to any of the rights, duties or obligations arising under it the prevailing party shall be entitled to cover from the other party, in a addition to costs and disbursements allowed by law, such sum as the trial and appellate court may award as reasonable attorneys' fee in such suit, action, or other proceeding, and any appeal thereof.

7. REPRESENTATION: The parties agree that they have each have a complete and unequivocal right to seek legal advice and/or representation from any attorney regarding the matters set forth in this mutual release and agreement. PCS acknowledges that it has consulted with its attorney XXX, and is satisfied with the representation it received with respect to this mutual release and agreement. The Booners acknowledge that they have either consulted with an attorney and aresatisfied with the representation they received with respect to this mutual release and agreement, or they acknowledge that they have knowingly and voluntarily waived their right to seek legal rep.

END

OKAY - SO .......Should we sign it? Also, happy these are coming off DH's. BONUS! My reports will be nearly clean!!! We're talking 10 collections alone on EQ!!!

Thank you for reading this.

And of course, thank you MYFICO FORUM for giving me all the info I needed to write such a stunning letter as to get this reaction!!! Woo HOO!!

Re: HOLY MAJOLY!! READ THIS RESPONSE FROM PCS ATTORNEY!! NEED HELP

Anonymous — Sun, 19 Feb 2012 21:49:23 GMT

Looks like a win but signing may let them off the hook (financially) if there was a violation.

Re: HOLY MAJOLY!! READ THIS RESPONSE FROM PCS ATTORNEY!! NEED HELP

RobertEG — Sun, 19 Feb 2012 21:58:21 GMT

Not in a million years...

The judge decreed the outcome. His words and ruling stand. Each party is entitled to act upon the terms of that judgment in their own manner. You have no reason to stipulate to anything.

They have stated an intent to delete. I see no reason to make that contingent upon any concession on your part, unless they are trying to block what they consider might be a legitimate action on your part.

I would welcome the chance to take that letter back to the judge and advise him of their efforts to have you agree to stipulations that he did not seem necessary in his decision.

He is attempting to modify the terms of the ruling.

Re: HOLY MAJOLY!! READ THIS RESPONSE FROM PCS ATTORNEY!! NEED HELP

Booner72 — Sun, 19 Feb 2012 22:01:55 GMT

Robert - the judgment is already vacated and off the reports. What's left are the collections. All I really do want is them removed. I have no desire to go off to court and have to get organized to fight them, though I believe I could get at least 10K because that's the max in small claims, and there are 12 total accounts that are DH's. They also, IMO, are violating HIPAA bc they are paid, and they violated by continuing to verify the accounts that belong to DH whenever I disputed them.

If you weren't off in the Phillipines I'd hire you to write a nice letter back to them.

So what do I do, then?

(Thanks in advance and I'm so happy you responsed so fast!! I was so excited when I got this I am still shaking)

Re: HOLY MAJOLY!! READ THIS RESPONSE FROM PCS ATTORNEY!! NEED HELP

Booner72 — Sun, 19 Feb 2012 22:09:42 GMT

@Anonymous wrote:
Looks like a win but signing may let them off the hook (financially) if there was a violation.

Definitely, Drkaje. They have two attorneys involved in this now, took the time to write up a legal doc. Seems to me I had them a little worried. My letter was GOOD, IMO. In my letter I said if you delete, I will go away, all i want is a delete. now, well ,maybe I want more than that!

MAYBE AN ATTORNEY WILL TAKE ME ON CONTINGENCY NOW THAT I HAVE THIS!

Re: HOLY MAJOLY!! READ THIS RESPONSE FROM PCS ATTORNEY!! NEED HELP

RobertEG — Sun, 19 Feb 2012 22:18:26 GMT

That then would point me in the direction....... what was the basis in the court decision that led to vacating the judgment?

If it was vacated for administrative reasons, then that would probably not apply to the accuracy of the prior collection activities on the debt.

However, if the judge vacating for some reason that related to the accuracy of the debt itself, or its collectibility, then that would transfer back to the preceding collection activities.

What was the factual ruling of the court that led them to vacating the judgment, and do those facts also apply to the legitimacy of their prior collection activity?

Re: HOLY MAJOLY!! READ THIS RESPONSE FROM PCS ATTORNEY!! NEED HELP

Booner72 — Sun, 19 Feb 2012 22:29:37 GMT

EDIT. Sorry.

Re: HOLY MAJOLY!! READ THIS RESPONSE FROM PCS ATTORNEY!! NEED HELP

Booner72 — Sun, 19 Feb 2012 22:25:58 GMT

Robert, I just wrote a GW letter to the judge and attached a copy of the satisfaction along with a "motion to vacate" form that I found online and used white-out to rid the other county listed! i didn't even file anything.

She didn't write back so i figured she threw it in the trash. come to find out 5 months letter, she granted my motion to vacate, I have the court records and she signed that motion and it's now off the reports and is legally vacated.

Re: HOLY MAJOLY!! READ THIS RESPONSE FROM PCS ATTORNEY!! NEED HELP

MarineVietVet — Mon, 20 Feb 2012 03:06:31 GMT

I agree with Robert and drkaje. I wouldn't sign anything. They said they would delete so hold them to it. No stipulations.

Re: HOLY MAJOLY!! READ THIS RESPONSE FROM PCS ATTORNEY!! NEED HELP

Booner72 — Mon, 20 Feb 2012 03:28:02 GMT

@MarineVietVet wrote:
I agree with Robert and drkaje. I wouldn't sign anything. They said they would delete so hold them to it. No stipulations.

Looks to me like they only agree to delete if I sign their form "In exchange for" is their words. Do you think this letter would be enough to send to the CRA's if they don't delete?

Re: HOLY MAJOLY!! READ THIS RESPONSE FROM PCS ATTORNEY!! NEED HELP

MarineVietVet — Mon, 20 Feb 2012 04:11:10 GMT

@Booner72 wrote:

Looks to me like they only agree to delete if I sign their form "In exchange for" is their words. Do you think this letter would be enough to send to the CRA's if they don't delete?

I would remind them of their own words: HOWEVER, we do agree that the best course of action in this case would be to simply remove these accounts from your credit report and resolve any of concerns that you may have.

I would hold them to those words and go no further. They say the best thing to do is "remove these accounts". Then they need to do it.

No signed agreements; no letting them off the hook.

Re: HOLY MAJOLY!! READ THIS RESPONSE FROM PCS ATTORNEY!! NEED HELP

LIGHTNIN — Mon, 20 Feb 2012 10:21:24 GMT

HOLY MAJOLY, your right. Boy o boy Booner you really got their attention.

I really don't understand why, they need such a legal document, for something as simple like deleting items from a CR's.

And why include, all the stuff about attorneys fees.

If you both are thinking about signing this, have an attorney look it over first.

Most attorneys will do a first visit consultation for free.Good Luck to both of you.

IME with attorneys over the last 3 yrs hasn't been good.But last weeks meeting,things are looking promising.

Re: HOLY MAJOLY!! READ THIS RESPONSE FROM PCS ATTORNEY!! NEED HELP

pizzadude — Mon, 20 Feb 2012 14:42:53 GMT

This the CA/attorney's way of saving face and getting out from under the possiblity of being liable if you take them to court. Did you think that they would delete the collections based on your intent to sue and do you have the intent to proceed with a small claims action now, since they did not delete the accounts ?

Unless you really intend to proceed with your lawsuit then I would consider this request, although you should ask a lawyer to review it first.

Re: HOLY MAJOLY!! READ THIS RESPONSE FROM PCS ATTORNEY!! NEED HELP

Booner72 — Mon, 20 Feb 2012 18:11:03 GMT

Hi, Pizza and Lightnin. Thanks for your replies and reading! Much appreciated.

I never even really considered going to Court to sue them seriously (Other than small claims) bc of the pain in the arse factor and related court costs. But now that I have this letter from them that indicates that they are concerned I will sue, well maybe they see I DO have a case. Without changes made, I will NOT sign this letter.

These aren't the LAST derogs (yes last collections, tho) so it's not like my score is going to go up 100 points or anything anyway. In this case, my score is not the #1 thing. At least not anymore.

If I went to court I have them for 8000.00 worth of FACTA violations. ( 8 accounts reported that aren't mine x 1000.00)

What got their attention, IMO, was finding out that this case is VACATED. I want that fact added to the "recitals" they list on the Motion.

This Motion gives them all the "hand" in the case, whereas right now, I have it. Kinda at least. Who cares about my score if I can truly sue them and win? i don't need any credit right now. yes, i got greedy since I got this letter from them. They don't need to release me of any liability, since I have none. I don't owe them one red cent.

Re: HOLY MAJOLY!! READ THIS RESPONSE FROM PCS ATTORNEY!! NEED HELP

MissMia75 — Mon, 20 Feb 2012 18:35:28 GMT

@Booner72 wrote:
Hi, Pizza and Lightnin. Thanks for your replies and reading! Much appreciated.

I never even really considered going to Court to sue them seriously (Other than small claims) bc of the pain in the arse factor and related court costs. But now that I have this letter from them that indicates that they are concerned I will sue, well maybe they see I DO have a case. Without changes made, I will NOT sign this letter.

These aren't the LAST derogs (yes last collections, tho) so it's not like my score is going to go up 100 points or anything anyway. In this case, my score is not the #1 thing. At least not anymore.

If I went to court I have them for 8000.00 worth of FACTA violations. ( 8 accounts reported that aren't mine x 1000.00)

What got their attention, IMO, was finding out that this case is VACATED. I want that fact added to the "recitals" they list on the Motion.

This Motion gives them all the "hand" in the case, whereas right now, I have it. Kinda at least. Who cares about my score if I can truly sue them and win? i don't need any credit right now. yes, i got greedy since I got this letter from them. They don't need to release me of any liability, since I have none. I don't owe them one red cent.

WOW!!!! Check your PM's...

Re: HOLY MAJOLY!! READ THIS RESPONSE FROM PCS ATTORNEY!! NEED HELP

RobertEG — Mon, 20 Feb 2012 22:31:27 GMT

As a last, lingering thought....no, I would not involve the CRAs in this.

They are offering private negotiation terms to you. The CRAs have no part in that process.

Re: HOLY MAJOLY!! READ THIS RESPONSE FROM PCS ATTORNEY!! NEED HELP

Booner72 — Tue, 21 Feb 2012 00:57:23 GMT

@RobertEG wrote:
As a last, lingering thought....no, I would not involve the CRAs in this.
They are offering private negotiation terms to you. The CRAs have no part in that process.

I only brought that up in case they refuse to delete. Robert, I did answer your last question about why the judgment was vacated as you said that would steer you in which direction to go - Now that you have that information, are you steered in any other direction aside from not signing the form in a million years? BTW, I'm not signing it. That's all I know so far, but I know that much. I see no benefit. Thanks in advance.

Re: HOLY MAJOLY!! READ THIS RESPONSE FROM PCS ATTORNEY!! NEED HELP

Booner72 — Tue, 21 Feb 2012 18:23:04 GMT

I talked to an attorney over the phone (EAP referral) and scanned him copies of the letter I wrote, and the letter they wrote back. He says it sounds pretty standard. He says since I can't prove that I was denied credit for these specific accounts (bc I have other derogs) that there is no way i could win a lawsuit. We talked about the 1000.00 violations for the four accounts, and he's not sure I could win, it could drag out and really, all i wanted was them GONE in the first place. Plus I can't handle the stress of something like that.

I do see this as a very nice win!

So I just talked to Joe Schmoe (attorney) at PCS and told him that I wanted it also on the documents that the OC's can never come back at me for these accounts either (As they are still owned by them), that I want it more clear that both DH and Myself will be rid of all the collections on on 3 reports. He told me it's their standard protocal to send that Mutual Agreement out if someone sends them an ITS letter. (Shoulda done this MONTHS ago). I asked him why in one paragraph it says they will simply delete, then goes on about the Mutual Agreement. That's when he went into their policy blah blah. I also am having him put on the RECITALS section that the judgment was VACATED on 4/19/11.

It's also nice to see that I have all "goods" in the Understanding your Score section (Except new credit is BAD!!). The only good I had before was length of credit because I have a 1998 student loan that is still reporting away -

TU is down to only 3 collections (2 are PCS and will be gone).

They have already deleted the collections off my EX and and the only collection left is that UNIQUE COLLECTION library bill - that I'm going to start GW'ing to death since I paid it, hoping they will shorten their 1 year policy.

I'm still stuck of course with a 2005 BK. And two 90 day lates on Sallie Mae for 07 and 08. I don't remember being late (really) and I don't see how they can report only 90's and not 30's and 60's. I've GW'd and Disputed and they remain. I emailed that CEO contact that is going around on the forum, and I got ignored.

So thanks again to this forum's wealth of knowledge! What a great day in the world of rebuilding!!! I feel VICTORIOUS.

Re: HOLY MAJOLY!! READ THIS RESPONSE FROM PCS ATTORNEY!! NEED HELP

GoodCredBen — Tue, 21 Feb 2012 18:28:04 GMT

holy cow....

you are such a WINNER!

Congratz, i want your scores!!! (lol i say that to like everyone that i reply to hahahahaha)

Re: HOLY MAJOLY!! READ THIS RESPONSE FROM PCS ATTORNEY!! NEED HELP

Booner72 — Sat, 03 Mar 2012 03:03:36 GMT

UPDATE: They filed the Universal Data Forms on me on 2/16 and guess what? They're all still there on EQ and TU (EX gone last week).

They filed for DH on Monday, and guess what? They were gone by Thursday morning. His EQ went from 637 to 651 by removing 10 collections, leaving three - That he will be stuck with until they fall off.

So I had to Dispute them all with the CRA's. The witch-with-the-b-in-front at the CA told me that I had to just the CRA's "do their thing bc I did mine." I know from experience that once someone agrees to delete something and sends it, it really does only take 3-5 days at most. I tried to get the CRA's to let me send in the copies of the deletionslisted on the Universal Data Forms the CA sent, and they said it would be easier to just dispute it.

Do you want to know how many arguments I've had with TU and EQ CSR's over the past week? One lady told me they stay from the DOLA, and argued me about it. GGRRRRRRRR

Anyway, thought I'd let ya'll know.