[pandmel]

I have on my credit file an account listed with Certegy. I did a dispute with the CRA and directly from certegy. It cam back verified.

I requested a copy of my Certegy "credit file" and received a letter stating no information was in their file.

The alleged debt is where I stopped payment on a check to a cruise to nowhere casino. This type of "debt" is unenforceable in my home state even though the cruise originates and ends here. It would be considered a gambling debt and the alleged debt occurred in international waters not anywhere in the US or my home state.

I have attached both letters to this post.

My questions are:

It would appear that Certegy is a CA by the definitions, however they don't follow that protocol in any communication I have had with them. As a guarantee service are they a CA or OC?

The conflicting letters indicate that they did not provide me with a copy of my CR with them. What if any recourse is available?

They added a service charge which is applicable for bounced checks but there is no provision in GA law for adding a service charge for stop payment checks. You can be sued for a stop payment check and recover 2 X the face amount plus cost but this would be dismissed so fast because it is a non legitimate debt under GA law and the utterance did not occur in the state of GA. There is no jurisdiction that they could pursue this under unless there is some maritime law that would apply.


Any pointers on how to proceed would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks and HAPPY NEW YEAR


Pandmel

[jlynn]

Got a link to the actual statutes?

[Pale Rider]

IMO, it would be easy for them to show that

1 gambling debts are not covered by FDCPA, and they had no obligation to provide the notices.

2 They have a right to report to a CRA, as long as the information is complete and accurate. The fact that the debt was not "legal" does not make the transaction disappear. You did write a check that was not honored by your bank. That is a statement of fact that can be reported.

[centex]

Let me make sure I have this correct...you willingly got onto a boat for the express purpose of gambling, wrote a check to defray losses or gain more chips from the outset, decided you didn't like the outcome and then opted to stop payment on the check as soon as you were back in dock.

And I suppose you would have refused their money had you actually won...

I'd be interested in seeing the State statute that you rely upon in arriving at the determination that your debt incurred through a legitimate business was one that did not have to be paid. The only statutes I have seen that addressed gambling debts tended to deal with offshore wire transfers for non-regulated entities.

[pandmel]

Originally Posted by centex

And I suppose you would have refused their money had you actually won...

Actually the details are as follows. I went on the boat and cashed a check. Gambled and then entered a poker tournament. The cage closed where the check was cashed. Won in the poker tournament and was paid in "chips" not cash. There was no way to cash the chips they told us to bring them back on a later voyage, which was not feasible. They would not pay in cash because we had returned to territorial waters before the tournament ended.

Was my first and last voyage.

They are reporting it as a returned check and is a returned check but not a NSF. I just want it off my report. I will not pay it to show a "paid" bounced check on my credit file. I offered Certegy the chips that I have which total over 300 for payment and they are not interested. When I call the cruise line the only way to cash the chips is to cruise again, I am not interested.

They did not give me "gaming chips" for the check they gave cash and then gave me non negotiable gaming chips in return for my cash.

Maybe not entirely justified on my part but that is how the ball bounces....

Certegy refuses to provide me with a copy of the check.

Guess I will deal with it...

Pandmel

[pandmel]

Originally Posted by Pale Rider

IMO, it would be easy for them to show that

1 gambling debts are not covered by FDCPA, and they had no obligation to provide the notices.

Not a gaming debt. Cash was provided for the check not gaming chip, nor was it to pay off a marker.

Originally Posted by Centex

I'd be interested in seeing the State statute that you rely upon in arriving at the determination that your debt incurred through a legitimate business was one that did not have to be paid.

They do not have "check cashing" license which is required in order to provide cash back over a purchase amount of to charge a fee for those services in Georgia. Even the grocery stores have them as it is required. That would make it impossible for the cruise line to to use Georgia Courts to enforce this or any holder.

Pandmel

[Pale Rider]

Originally Posted by pandmel

Not a gaming debt. Cash was provided for the check not gaming chip, nor was it to pay off a marker.

I don't think you can have it both ways. You can't claim the debt was not legal due to being a gambling debt, but not a gambling debt for purposes of the FDCPA. You need to choose 1 definition and stick with it, otherwise IMO, they are going to stick you.

If you go with the above, you have no defense under the state statute, because you received cash for the check. That equals a legitimate debt, no matter what you did with it later. It was your choice to trade the cash for chips.

[centex]

The other factor here is whether it is the laws of Georgia that would apply or those of another State. Just because the boat docks in Georgia does not always mean that their corporate operation is subject to Georgia law- you would need to review a number of commerce statutes and then review what reciprocal agreements exist.

I'm a little lost by the "cash over purchase" issue you now raise...it seems to me that you provided them with a check in return for them giving you access to a particular game...in other words, you tendered the check for an agreed-upon service.

If there was no notice posted ANYWHERE regarding the inability to redeem the chips, then there could be a breach of implied contract on redemption, but that does not provide you with the defense to stopping payment on the check. My guess, though, is that we are not being provided with the full story here...

[pandmel]

Originally Posted by centex

The other factor here is whether it is the laws of Georgia that would apply or those of another State. Just because the boat docks in Georgia does not always mean that their corporate operation is subject to Georgia law- you would need to review a number of commerce statutes and then review what reciprocal agreements exist.

I'm a little lost by the "cash over purchase" issue you now raise...it seems to me that you provided them with a check in return for them giving you access to a particular game...in other words, you tendered the check for an agreed-upon service.

If there was no notice posted ANYWHERE regarding the inability to redeem the chips, then there could be a breach of implied contract on redemption, but that does not provide you with the defense to stopping payment on the check. My guess, though, is that we are not being provided with the full story here...

Well the ships registry is Panama.

The check was written for cash.

No Notice other than posted cashier times. Payout was given after the "cage" closed. So no way to redeem the "payout".

I have no reason but to provide the whole story.

A new crystal ball is in order.

Pandmel

[direred]

Originally Posted by pandmel

Well the ships registry is Panama.

The check was written for cash.

Under international law, Panama is the applicable law. You enter a foreign country when you set foot on a ship of foreign registry.

(I used to be a purser.)