Questions about a collector that I’m pretty sure is doing many things in violation?

[Anonymous]

I am going to keep it short initially for the responses to begin because I’m not a fan of big ole’ long posts especially when it is replied to and original content is attached and you have to search where the response truly begins.

So i have a collection that was supposed to drop early 2018. I disputed directly because the beginning date was 2011 and I didn’t take on any credit from about 2009-2016 at all. It did drop of for 3-4 months and reappeared in april of 2018 with a beginning date of 2015, different amounts, 2 different names of CA and different addresses but similar names of the people they say had the debt previously. I did a reverse address on all the different addresses i have found associated and every single one tends to be an address of a mail box place or a ups store that also has mail boxes. I also found a humans name attached to the dispute ahead of the company. Did some more digging and found another name but the last name is different. This person also has replied to consumers complaints on BBB and they don’t talk like a business person would, using the word “debtor” to every response. A googling of the companies (there is like 6 company names associated with this person) only turns up really vague info like a phone number and address. I know for sure this person has illegally re-aged because the new drop off is 2022 when it should be 2018. This person also faked one payment on the year 2015 to try and extend it out even though they can’t....Im understanding that only original original creditor can change drop date etc etc. I really get the suspicion that this person changes his own company name and sells the debt to himself to try and reage it using a new number but sometimes accidentally the same associated mail box place and new last name and changes amounts owed even with the fake payment made would have not changed the amount to they are now saying. I really think possibly this person is not even a real CA. I think they found my info somehow and are attempting the halfway debt collection scam but with reporting attached. Any help would be a welcome and a very interesting read as well as something everyone I believe needs to look for.

[Anonymous]

If you have proof of the violation of SOL, file a complaint against the CRA and the "CA" with the CFPB.  There are people that do buy old debts for pennies on the dollar but they are not allowed to reage, only attempt to collect.  I hope someone that knows the CFPB article that is being violated here and can share it with you.  Also contact your state Attorney General and file a complaint against both. 

Good Luck.

edited typo

[RobertEG]

Once a debt collector has reported to a CRA, they are then required under FCRA 623(a)(5) to separately and explicitly report the date of first delinquency to the CRA no later than 90 days after having reported their collection.

The CRA then uses that date, and that date alone, to determine the exclusion date.  No other date,  such as date of any payment or date of reporting of their collection, has any relevance to the exclusion date.

Improper reaging is a term used to designate the reporting of a later and improper DOFD in order to extend the credit report exclusion date of the collection.

The debt collector obtains the DOFD under the procedure set forth in section 623(a)(5), which can require them to contact the original creditor, but it is not the original creditor who reports the DOFD.  It is the debt collector.  Section 623(a)(5) sets forth a detailed, multi-step procedure, by which a debt collector obtains and reports the DOFD.

Thus, a challenge of the reported DOFD is by way of a challenge of their compliance with section 623(a)(5).

First, have you viewed a credit report that shows the actual, specific DOFD that was reported by the debt collector?

Second, did you file a dispute with the CRA that specifically challenged their compliance with section 623(a)(5)?

You must first file a dispute with the CRA asserting an inaccurate DOFD before you can file a civil action that then permits you to pursue the next step, which is then filing of civil action under FCRA 623(c), thus permitting access to the court discovery process in determining how the debt collector obtained the reported DOFD, and binding judicial review of its accuracy.

[Anonymous]

I had mine drop off in 2015 after 7 years the statue of limitations ran out to collect from the original creditor. There are shady companies out there that will try to re-age the debt which is illegal, they can buy all this old debt all they want, all you have to tell them is to pound sand and stop contacting you.  Than document if they continue to harass you and take them to small claims court and collect on the violations.

[Anonymous]

Yes i have viewed it on a new report. But its not the DOFD its the expected drop off which is 2022 but the previous account they had dropped had a start date of 4/08/2011 which could only make the maximum drop date of 10/2018. This was on the first listing they had I noticed from 2017 till i disputed in jan 2018. They took it off and 4/2018 hey reposted it with different amounts and a different address different dates of opened 4/10/2015. Also Transunion has it listed as one company and EX has it as another company but similar original creditors with a variation and different addresses. These places are all in one city but the mailing address keeps changing due to them using a ups store to get mail. One of the addresses is no longer a ups. I did already file a dispute just 3 days ago and EX told me that was reaging. Plus i have all kinds of evidence where this company or person has been, extra addresses of a possible residence or two. I have 4-5 names associated with it 3 of them have the same first name. I have screenshots of the addresses of the ups store they are operating their mail from.

So you’re saying I have a lawsuit then after I file a complaint with my attorney general? Im pretty sure i have an old report around here somewhere too to show the original drop off date at least with EX and possibly Transunion too. Its not listed on EQ

[Anonymous]

Couldn’t I effectively take the to court anyway since it has caused a score depression costing me better rates, terms, and possibly a few No’s to applications?

[Anonymous]

By the way just so you guys know I’ve been a member of MYFICO for over a year. I’ve read many posts and learned quite a bit. I know it says I’m a new member. Truly just new to posting something for the first time. It’s quite a process in itself to figure out how to post. It’s not an easy task which i think would be nice to create a forum app or at least make posting a bit more user friendly. But i love this place.

[Anonymous]

I think how this person is getting around DOFD is he sells the debt to himself and changes his name the company name and the amounts owed and then sets up shop at a different ups store so it looks like a completely different debt but its the same one because I didn’t take on any credit whatsoever between 2009 and 2016.

[RobertEG]

I suggest that you read FCRA 623(a)(5) in detail, as it defines the acceptable process for a debt collector to obtain the DOFD.

In a nutshell, it is ultimately based on the debt collector acquiring the DOFD from the creditor, either based on using a DOFD that was previsously reported by the creditor to a CRA, or by contacting the creditor and attempting to obtain it directly from the creditor.

The source of the DOFD is the creditor.  The only way that a debt collector can make their own determination of probable DOFD is if the creditor has not previously reported the DOFD on their account to a CRA, and the debt collector has made a good faith effort to contact the OC and attempt to obtain the DOFD, and that reasonable attempt has failed.

Changing ownership of the debt after it passes from the original creditor would not affect the DOFD.

[Anonymous]

I had this issue and filed a complaint with CFPB and it went away very quickly.  CFPB is the quick way to resolve this but you do have the right to sue. I assume you can do both.