MORE MIDLAND MADNESS! PLEASE PLEASE ADVISE!!

[rom828]

These guys are snakes!

Rec'd a collection letter dated 4-17-08 from Midland advising they'd purchased my old cap 1 acct.

My atty (who is also helping me with other report issues) sent  DV letter CMRRR and FedEx to all 4  addresses,  including the one they advised in letter to send all correspondence to.

Midland signed for letter on 5-14, 27 days from date of their letter.

Pulled my TU and EX today to see if other dispute corrections were reflected on FICO report yet, and lo and behold, by scores were down 40+ points!!

Midland has reported as a new collection w/report date of 5-16 on TU and is reporting as a new acct as of 5-08(no day)  120 days past due!!!!

They have not validated the debt and it looks like they reported right after they rec'd my DV letter! of course the letter they sent has all the little disclaimers on the back advising I have 30 days from receipt of letter to dispute and that they wont report , etc, etc.

I am so livid!  I wouldnt have even known they reported if I hadnt pulled the reports for other reasons. And I'm really mad as I have scorewatch and havent rec'd  any alert from them at all!!  I wasnt going to pull reports til I rec'd ad alert, but as I said I was checking on status of another dispute so pulled all 3 reports.

I've notfied atty's office and I'l be talking with him tomorrow, but i'm sure I wont sleep a wink tonight!

Isnt this illegal and/or in violation of the FCRA??  My understanding is they have to validate before they can report.    And how can it be reported anyway as a collection on one and an account on another?!?!

This is so distressing!  I just got new Amex cards last month and Iknow they do reviews and instead of my scores being up like they were, they are now way down!  EX isnt showing anY Midland info yet and that's my highest score at 709, but I'm sure it's just a matter of days before it shows on there. TU is now 641 down from 687 and EQ is 640 down from 665 (EQ has been lower  than TU & EX all along because of reporting errors not on other reports).

PLEASE somebody give me some insight!!   Wont they have to remove the reporting until they validate?  This acct is actually past SOL according to my old cap1 statments and old credit reports, but that will come up further down the road I suppose, depending on what Midland has for validation.

I'm just worried about them reporting before validation and the ramifications of having it on my reports. 

I'm sorry this is so poorly written..I've been completely scatterbrained since I ran the reports!  but is anyone can please advise, encourage, etc, PLEASE let me hear from you!!!!

[Anonymous]

This is why I use true credit, score watch has never alerted me, if they fixed it it might be worth it, sucks that im stuck 3 months with them till i can cancel UGH

[Anonymous]

If they reported AFTER they received the DV request and BEFORE they answered, yes it is a violation.

As for SW, it does not monitor your score daily.

[rom828]

Then they are indeed in violation as they signed for the DV on 5-14 and reported on 5-16.

I should be hearing back from atty today, but wondering what to expect?!?! 

Not sure what the next step is?  Will my atty have to sue to get it off my report?! 

As I said, I read posts on this forum that lead me to believe Midland doesnt care whether they 'follow the rules' and once they report it can be difficult to get the removed.  And according to some of the posts, their method of validation is to request they be provided with proof of the debt rather than the other way around....and I guess it must work for them or they wouldnt keep trying these tactics.

And the paralegal at my atty's office said this is common behavior for Midland (they've handled many many cases against them) and that they (Midland)  tend to look at suits etc as just the cost of doing business.

But since this is a violation, doesnt the CRA have to take it off when advised they didnt validate?

I wish I had a better handle on how all this works and I'm sure I'm ask ing questions that are answered if I'd read back thru the FCRA and other threads, but I guess right now I'm just looking for some encouragement.  I'd hoped this wasnt going to get so convuluted, and was having the atty help because I didnt feel confident in my ability to handle this one myself.

Any further thoughts, advices etc are appreciated!

Message Edited by rom828 on 05-22-2008 06:54 AM

[Anonymous]

---

rom828 wrote:

Then they are indeed in violation as they signed for the DV on 5-14 and reported on 5-16.

5-16 may be date that it appeared on your report, they may have actually reported it before they received the DV, they'd have to prove that tho. CRA can take their time updating.

I should be hearing back from atty today, but wondering what to expect?!?! 

Not sure what the next step is?  Will my atty have to sue to get it off my report?! 

As I said, I read posts on this forum that lead me to believe Midland doesnt care whether they 'follow the rules' and once they report it can be difficult to get the removed.  And according to some of the posts, their method of validation is to request they be provided with proof of the debt rather than the other way around....and I guess it must work for them or they wouldnt keep trying these tactics.

And the paralegal at my atty's office said this is common behavior for Midland (they've handled many many cases against them) and that they (Midland)  tend to look at suits etc as just the cost of doing business.

But since this is a violation, doesnt the CRA have to take it off when advised they didnt validate?

Nope.

I wish I had a better handle on how all this works and I'm sure I'm ask ing questions that are answered if I'd read back thru the FCRA and other threads, but I guess right now I'm just looking for some encouragement.  I'd hoped this wasnt going to get so convuluted, and was having the atty help because I didnt feel confident in my ability to handle this one myself.

Any further thoughts, advices etc are appreciated!

Message Edited by rom828 on 05-22-2008 06:54 AM

---

Midland is tough and I think about every member here is/has dealt with them.

My spouse and I are both dealing with them.