Tricky: CA report account as "open" instead of a collection acct

[Anonymous]

Karma - you are my prince/princess - THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm all over it and am SICK OF IT!!!  I have nothing NICE to say to them, and am going to hopefully STING them for whatever I can...would LOVE to hit them in Federal Court with a $2M lawsuit - why not? !!  Reach for the sky hey?!!

THANK You - seriously, this is the BEST!!!

[Anonymous]

Karma,

This is the most clear information I have gotten re: this. It seems that Floridateacher and I have a very similar problem with Midland.  I have a thread asking questions about how to handle this.  I hope you do not mind if I pick your brain about this.  I just do not want to do anything to make the situation worse.  This installment/open/closed/120 day late... descrepencies all over the place are quite confusing.  The OC is not even on my reports except for where TU makes mention that Midland got it from them. 

[Anonymous]

Thanks for the great info Karma.  I really couldn't figure out what to do about this Palisades problem.  I am extremely curious to see what happens with the lawsuit filed against them for doing this very thing.

It sounds like I have a case......but I really just want to get it off my report and then try to settle the account with AT &  T/ Cingular. 

I thought my first step should be to dispute it with the bureaus, but now it sounds like I should DV Palisades first and then dispute.  Right????

[Anonymous]

I've been thinking a lot about this situation.  I think it must be wrong for a collection agency to report an account first as "open."  I do not have any written contract with them, I have no line of credit with them, I have no agreement with them whatsoever except for whatever rights were assigned to them through the original A T & T contract for cellular service.

Next, how can they report a collection account as 120 day or more being overdue?  As I have no contract with them, it is not a revolving or installment account with them, how can it be overdue?

I am going to dispute it with the bureaus first.  Then, if needed, and it likely will be, I will DV the CA.  If they properly debt verify (DV) then I will send them a cease and desist letter.  I will wait a week,then send the OC a PFD offer, with a copy of the cease and desist letter.

So, experienced board members, what do you think of this idea?  Anxiously awaiting your responses....thanks

[ChuckG]

I have had this happen to me as well with Asset Acceptance, only it did not happen until I settled with them and began paying them off. Since then, my scored have dropped roughly 60 points thanks to them "opening" an account with me that is 120+ days past due and also it shows past due for double the amount that I owe.

see my post here http://ficoforums.myfico.com/fico/board/message?board.id=generalcredit&thread.id=78341

I suppose in my case the "open" account is slightly more legitimate than in your cases where you have not arranged to pay the CA at all. But it still seems like a bogus maneuver to reward my newly established payments with a big nasty on my credit report just for kicks.

[Anonymous]

I have something similar w/Palisades, but it is a PAID collection.  TU and Experian report it as a paid collection, but Equifax reports it as "Late 120 Days." The really annoying thing is that in Aug it was reported as a paid collection -- it has been changed in the last couple of weeks.  I paid it in full in Jan. 2007 just to make it go away (even though i had doubts that it was legit).  Here's how Equifax reports it:

Condition:  Derogatory

Balance:  $0

Type:  Collection

Pay Status:  Late 120 Days

[Anonymous]

Mine reported 120 lates "open" installment, which is crazy; then it changed in Aug. 07 as 90 days late - until reading a new post I didn't realize it was supposed to be reported as CLOSED, COLLECTION...so it has me all over the place w/UTL, they reported it again as 90 days late in Jan. 07 -- I can't wait for the FTC and AG offices to push harder on these people that completely ruin credit reports with false reporting, and the bureaus SHOULD be held accountable too!

[Anonymous]

What about if the OC TXU says $690 open account,  current, unknown, credit extension, review, or collection high balance $692, terms 10 months, opened 04/1999, reported 07/31/2005, responsi bility is individual.

What do you do in this case.  This was an old electric bill from a craft/antique store I once owned that I closed down in 12/99.  Why does it say reported 07/31/2005.

What can I do about this one.  On my report from 2006 or so it said collection account.

Is this the same trouble as you all are having.  What would you do?                                                                        

[Anonymous]

This is past CRTP - I would dispute it

---

wantingbettercredit wrote:

What about if the OC TXU says $690 open account,  current, unknown, credit extension, review, or collection high balance $692, terms 10 months, opened 04/1999, reported 07/31/2005, responsi bility is individual.

What do you do in this case.  This was an old electric bill from a craft/antique store I once owned that I closed down in 12/99.  Why does it say reported 07/31/2005.

What can I do about this one.  On my report from 2006 or so it said collection account.

Is this the same trouble as you all are having.  What would you do?                                                                        

---

[Anonymous]

Thanks Timothy.  Would you dispute it with the CRA or the OC?

I know this post should have been seperate, sorry for that.