Credit Acceptance Corp ~ Double Jepordy

[Anonymous]

I have a car loan that went sideways with Credit Acceptance Corp. Went to court and won, but a few years later they sent a collection agency after me. 

Same agency I previously won against.

At the time I ignored it, but now trying to build my credit I need to fix it 

Was not watching my file at the time and now see that the loan is still active with years of missed payments but the collection is being handled by the collection agency...

Is that legal? They are still reporting missed payments, but won't accept a parent from me. I need to make arrangements with the collection agency?!? And they'll continue to report missed payments until things are clear with the CA...

This is killing my on time payments I'm at 80something percent right now However, I do have a few new accounts that may raise that.

Suggestions?

[Brian_Earl_Spilner]

So, to be clear, you sued the collection agency and won? What was the lawsuit for and what was the outcome? Obviously you won, but what were the specifics? The debt would still exist with CAC since you didn't sue them over it.

[Anonymous]

Update I should have included:

Credit Acceptance *is* reporting. The CA *is not* reporting.

[gdale6]

Since you won the case you have a very good case for false credit reporting, each violation is worth 1K to you. You can either send the one reporting a cease and desist reporting letter (with demand for removal) or you will come for them for each violation of the FCRA... The other choice is to contact a consumer credit lawyer and see what they recommend.

[bass_playr]

Help us to understand the situation better.

First, who sued you, the OC or the CA?  When you say you won against them, what specifically did you win?  As in, what was the court's actual ruling?  If the court sided with you, it could have been one of several ways--and not all of those would give rise to double jeopardy, even if it did apply here.

That brings my next point---double jeopardy does not apply to your situation.  Double jeopardy means a criminal defendant who wins a criminal trial cannot be tried again for the same crime.  It has nothing to do with civil lawsuits.  Even if it did, the manner in which you won the last case could leave them wide open to pursue you again.  Keep in mind, double jeopardy is about court cases, not collection efforts.  Even if they sued you to collect, and you got a court to say that you do not owe that plaintiff, they CAN still take efforts to collect from you.  They could even sue you again unless you got their case dismissed "with prejudice".  This is why the actual ruling of the court matters so much in your situation.

Example, you could have gotten the court to dismiss their case on a procedural issue.  That would not prevent them in any way from suing again or trying to collect.

How long ago did you stop paying?  It is possible that they could be outside the applicable statutes of limitation.

[Anonymous]

27 July 2016

Credit Acceptance Corp* vs. 42yen (edit to remove my legal name)

"Court grants motion to dismiss without prejudice at the request of defendant"

*CAC was represented by the same CA trying to collect now via the courts.

20 Jan 2020

Same CA that represented CAC in my earlier case is trying to collect again with the usual issuance of interrogatories.

When I called CAC to find out when the CA was sold my account they said that the CA is just "handling" the account and that it is still open with them. Them being Credit Acceptance Corp.

I asked when the account with CAC will be cleared from my credit report and they said they will continue to report missed payments until I have paid the CA in full.

[bass_playr]

OK, so you're in court again then.  Because the dismissal was without prejudice, they are free to file again.  No double jeopardy.

However, I don't know the ins and outs of how you were able to get the case dismissed last time.  Some or all of what you did there could be used again, depending on what took place and if they changed anything.  

Also, keep this in mind too--they need to show the link between themselves and CAC, but only if it is challenged.  So, if you challenge their standing, since it's not theirs and they cannot produce chain of title of ownership of the debt showing their name on it, then they would have to produce admissible documentation showing their authority to act on behalf of CAC.  An affidavit attesting to this is generally hearsay and not admissible except under limited circumstances.  If you're interested, I have a good bit of experience in this arena.  Not an attorney but had to practically become one over the last decade in our own fight.  If you'd like, I could look over what they sent you and maybe help you to find something useful.

[Anonymous]

So I don't have much intel on this particularly. I can tell you that they're after us right now and got a judgement and everything. We tried fighting it, the dealership,  and got our attorney general involved and now because of them, we're filing bankruptcy this month actually. From what I've read and all the info I've researched, they do not go easy with trying to collect their money. I will be happy to not have the stress anymore.