No credit card required
Browse credit cards from a variety of issuers to see if there's a better card for you.
You can also write them a letter with proof that the acct is paid, then tell them to quit pursuing you or you will have to sue them for harrasment.
@Anonymous wrote:
I had a charged off account with capital one. The account was being collected upon through an agency called Unifund. I settled the account in full through unifund back around March. Capital one shows my account as settled in full.
Today I got two letters from a collection agency called global credit & collection Corp (distressed asset portfolio III, P.C.) saying that they have purchased this account from unifund and I owe them the full amount.
What is going on here? This is a paid collection. Why is a separate agency collecting on it? And what can I do?
I hope you got the settlement agreement in writing signed by Cap1. If not, then qas far as Global is concerned, there was no settlement agreement. If an agreement isn't in writing, there is no agreement.
@simplegirl wrote:
Capital One is already reporting that the account was settled in full so a collection agency can’t go over a original creditor saying you owe a balance. It’s up to the original creditor in writing or not as far as a balance being owed and since capital one is not reporting one there is no balance.
Please re-read the original post. Cap1 settled the debt through its collection agency and then sold the remainder of the debt to a Junk Debt Buyer (JDB). JDBs will buy debts that were wiped out in Bankruptcy, extinguished through Settlement or where the borrower is dead, and still try to collect. Obviously they JDB pays very little for these debts, maybe a penny or two on the dollar, but if they can collect a nickel on the dollar from the debtor or debtor's survivors, they can still make a profit. True, the new CA shouldn't try to collect ona debt that has been settled, but it's up to the OP to raise the settlement as a defense and will probably have to prove the settlement to the new CA.
Since you have a factual issue regarding the accuracy of their reporting of a collection, you have basis for filing a formal dispute with the CRA, requiring an investigation by the reporting debt collector and a reinvestigation by the CRA, all of which must be completed within 30 days.
The factual issue that you can assert is that the debt was paid, and thus there is no delinquent debt in fact upon which the new debt collector can have any collection authority, and thus any basis for report to a CRA.
A formal dispute is preferable, providing you have factual support for an assertion of inaccuracy, over a debt validation request, in that DV requests do not set any period for or requirement to respond. At best, they impose a bar against continued collection activites if the DV is timely.
@RobertEG wrote:Since you have a factual issue regarding the accuracy of their reporting of a collection, you have basis for filing a formal dispute with the CRA, requiring an investigation by the reporting debt collector and a reinvestigation by the CRA, all of which must be completed within 30 days.
The factual issue that you can assert is that the debt was paid, and thus there is no delinquent debt in fact upon which the new debt collector can have any collection authority, and thus any basis for report to a CRA.
A formal dispute is preferable, providing you have factual support for an assertion of inaccuracy, over a debt validation request, in that DV requests do not set any period for or requirement to respond. At best, they impose a bar against continued collection activites if the DV is timely.
This is both a FCRA and a FDCPA issue - meaning two suits against the new CA. Suit #1 for the FDCPA violation of misrepresenting the legal character of the debt - in this case that you owe anything, and then suit #2 would be a FCRA suit for knowingly misreporting the debt to a Credit Bureau. When dealing with Junk Deby Buyers, I have found that the best defense is a good offense, and nothing gets their attention faster than recieving a summons. That is why I sue first and ask later.