MIDLAND SUCCCESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! AYEEEEYAAAHA!!!!

[rom828]

You're exactly right about the exortion..and intimidation, etc...

just like my atty said, getting sued, etc is to them  just the cost of doing business.

Well, I for one cant wait to cost them something!!

You definitely have them in a lose/lose situation (love it!) so I will be eager to see how long it takes them to realize they lost and remove themselves from your reports!!!!!

[Anonymous]

Crap!

Here is BBBs response to mine;

**The above-named company has advised the Better Business Bureau that their position in this case remains as previously stated. As both parties have provided position statements and the problem has not been resolved, the case is unpursuable through the Bureau's voluntary dispute resolution program. The active file on the case has been closed and made part of the BBB's records.

Your additional comments have been sent to the business.

Your cooperation with the Bureau's alternative dispute resolution program has been appreciated; the BBB regrets we were unable to assist the parties in reaching a mutually satisfactory settlement.
**

So now BBB says Midland says they basically stand by their position (they will remove) and BBB considers it 'unresolved' (because I won't resolve until Midland does what they say???) and it is closed.

Midland is going to just say f-it I'd imagine. I am going to call the lady who signed the 'we will remove' and make sure she takes it off and if not tell her/ceo/.all that I will take THAT to court as well and re-file with the FTC.

Also sending a copy of her letter to the CRAs.

[Anonymous]

Well as long as I'm being pro-active

I called the Compliance Expert who replied to BBB, she said they would update on their next round, as the last one was 5/15 (true since that is when it is listed as updated on TU) it should be around the 15th (which is this weekend) and that it could take 30-90 days for the CRAs to update. So far to me it seems pretty immediate; when they updated on 5/15 it showed up almost immediatly, ditto when IC Systems deleted.

I am also faxing and mailing to the CRAs the Midland Letter to expedite that as well. Hoping by mid-next week it is gone.

I think I am going to pass on Cap1 PFD only because it is off in September, why stir a sleeping dog, and even though Amazon says 'No COs' it is a 7 year old one with what will be a perfect report otherwise and probably mid-700s.

[rom828]

I sure hope so, too, for your sake! 

You have got to be ready to pull your hair out!!!!!

I may wind up going through a lot of what you're going through, even with atty's help, because Midland doesnt care about credit law and the CRAs are a joke as far as disputes.  I figured since I was having the atty help me w/Midland, I'd also have him help me w/some incorrect reporting from a couple of other old OCs.  I tried to dipute myself and got the usual 'verified" and when I tried to re-dispute was told 'already verified".   We'll see how all that comes out!  One of them that needs correcting is the Cap1 CO, but since they sold to Midland, I'm not doing anything with that until we get Midland cleared up!  But I've got all my old stmts and reports and Cap 1 was doing a lot of contradictory reporting!

It is so ridiculous to have to go through all this when a CA is in the wrong!  And I know from your previous posts, AG and FTC were no help to you  so I never did even waste my time.  I'm in Ga, so SOL is 4 yrs from DOFD.  There have been  case exceptions is some courts to that,  whereby judge deemed w/i SOL if CCC produced signed application ..it was then considered written contract and has 6 yrs.  Atty advises that he feels quite certain in my case the 4 yrs will apply, so I am beyond SOL.  It will be interesting to see what if anything Midland produces for DV!

I'm keeping my fingers crossed for you and can't wait to see your update on this!  I'm selfishly hoping that your good result will bode well for me having the same!!!

Message Edited by rom828 on 06-11-2008 11:55 AM

[rom828]

Just an update that so far Midland is deleted from TU, but still waiting outcome of getting them off EX and EQ.

At least they finally reported to those 2 as being in dispute, but so far TU is the only one that's deleted them after dispute.

Attorney sent one more round of letters (ITS this time)  out this week to EQ and EX  so hopefully that does the trick.

[Anonymous]

---

@rom828 wrote:

Just an update that so far Midland is deleted from TU, but still waiting outcome of getting them off EX and EQ.

At least they finally reported to those 2 as being in dispute, but so far TU is the only one that's deleted them after dispute.

Attorney sent one more round of letters (ITS this time)  out this week to EQ and EX  so hopefully that does the trick.

---

Midland won't report except in the slowest way possible. They dropped off of TU/Exp right after they agreed with BBB but that was a coincidence; I had already won the dispute with those two.

With Efax, I sent them a copy of Midland's agreement to drop. They said they had NOT gotten Midland's instruction to drop it, but even if they did it would take up to 60 days. Instead, I faxed them the letter, requested they CALL, not WRITE, and it disappeared 5 days later.

[rom828]

I think they actually came off TU after I found the name of the priority processor Laurie. One of the first reps for CRA that actually was helpful and told me they'd (Midland) be required to submit "a lot of stuff" or they'd be deleted.  I really think more my dispute with her than attorney's letter that got it off, but either way, they're off that one.   I'd also had problems with another TL reporting some negative in error and I've disputed several times since '05 to no avail and she got that straight too. 

I'm just trying to hit  Midland from every angle. 

EQ dispute that I initiated should be "resolved"  by the 20th as EQ advised they allow 45 days..TU only gave them 30. 

The atty had already sent letters to Midland and actually rec'd phone calls back from the same rep mentioned in the log on Hibbs site, but they still haven't  deleted, at least as of the 9th.

Atty sent today to  CRA's ITS w/copies of Midland letter advising they'd were deleting, as well as proof they signed for DV letter, etc. and asking for expedited processing.   And he's sending ITS to Midland as well (again--just reiterating that we're not playing!)

 As he's advised me, and was confirmed for me after I read a lot on the Bud Hibbs site I found from a link on one of your posts, Midland is the worst kind of bottom feeder and they don't scare easy.  Law suits to them are just the cost of doing business, and I really don't have the money to invest in a full fledged law suit with them.  Filing costs alone  in federal court  are $350.  It's ridiculous to even have to consider suing them to stop them from breaking the law!!  However, my atty has been up against them before many times and won, and said usually though the letters will eventually do the trick without having to actually file suit.

Hopefully I'll be posting back shortly with a "happy ending"!!

[rom828]

Just an update that Midland I finally off on all 3 now, after 3 or so months!

Got the EQ dispute papers yesterday  in the mail advising they were deleted,  ran reports on all 3 and Midland is gone.  I'd not disputed EX  myeself, , so guess the atty's letters/calls to Midland and the letters they sent to CRAs did that one.

I did dispute with TU and EQ so not sure which actions actually prompted the deletion; I'm just glad they're gone!!

Of course Capital 1 CO now has dola at 04-08 (date of sale I assume).

Now to wait and see if Midland tries to reinsert by coming up with bogus 'validation", or see what other JDB they sell it to.

I'm sure  it's not over yet, but for the moment Midland is finally off my reports!!

FICO TU 692  EQ 690  EX 719

Message Edited by rom828 on 07-20-2008 08:34 PM

[Anonymous]

Congrats to each of you who were able to get Midland off of your reports. They are such vicious vultures. My attempts to remove them were successful on only two of my CR, however, they updated to Equifax that I'd recently paid the account in full. Why would I pay on an account that was re-aged by 3 years? Legally it should not have been reported after 2007 so paying anything toward it would have been beyond stupidity on my behalf. I know that it's their way of keeping the negative information in my account longer. I'm just wondering how they "verified" with only one bureau. At any rate...CONGRATS again!

[rom828]

Tai,

I hope you're still disputing with EQ!  I'm not an expert on disputes by a long shot, but if you read all of nycc's posts you can sure learn a lot about what you can do! 

And with your situation, you should be able to readily dispute that you didnt pay the account. Maybe look on this forum about MOV letters, etc.  This account was obviously not really verified, so you need to take it to the next level. 

I knew Midland was evil incarnate, and I was very blessed to be able to enlist the help of an attorney. Even so, it took a lot of time and a lot of aggravation on my part also  to get them off my reports.

Just keep at it!!  Do NOT let them keep this bogus entry on your report.