CR TL

ilovemydogs · 08-16-2006, 10:38 AM

Palisades sued me on an alleged ATT bill. I had all my ducks in a row and the magistrate found for me and I got the case Dismissed with Prejudice : )
In the meantime TL's were put on by Palisades. (Never anything with ATT) and I disputed them, and they came back verified and updated .
I then again disputed AFTER my win, and EX told me they would not honor my dispute as I had disputed twice before and both times it came back verified and to take it up with Palisades.
So NOW what to do?
I believe EX is willingly supplying inaccurate info.

Thanks
ILMD

jlynn · 08-16-2006, 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ilovemydogs

Palisades sued me on an alleged ATT bill. I had all my ducks in a row and the magistrate found for me and I got the case Dismissed with Prejudice : )
In the meantime TL's were put on by Palisades. (Never anything with ATT) and I disputed them, and they came back verified and updated .
I then again disputed AFTER my win, and EX told me they would not honor my dispute as I had disputed twice before and both times it came back verified and to take it up with Palisades.
So NOW what to do?
I believe EX is willingly supplying inaccurate info.

Thanks
ILMD

I would start a FACTA dispute with Palisades - to cover all your bases. How did you attempt to dispute it after your win?

centex · 08-16-2006, 10:55 AM

If the TL was not placed until AFTER their suit was dismissed WITH prejudice, then I would suggest that you might want to flesh out retaliation claims for your letter to the Palisades general counsel.

I don't remember what state you are in, but state law may also be something you want to look at, to include DTPA claims.

Although the dismissal with prejudice does not automatically mean the underlying debt had no merit, the question for Palisades is whether they want to have to justify their actions to a jury in light of the dismissal.

jlynn · 08-16-2006, 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by centex

Although the dismissal with prejudice does not automatically mean the underlying debt had no merit, the question for Palisades is whether they want to have to justify their actions to a jury in light of the dismissal.

While the underlying debt might have merit, wouldn't Palisades (specifically) claim the debt has merit by continued reporting be false?

centex · 08-16-2006, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlynn

While the underlying debt might have merit, wouldn't Palisades (specifically) claim the debt has merit by continued reporting be false?

I'm not justifying the reporting. I believe that a claim of retaliation could be raised IF the reporting occurred only AFTER the dismissal. It takes thinking outside of the box to piece the ITS together, but I do not believe that they would want to go into court with the appearance of a retaliatory TL. Think outside of the box...

ilovemydogs · 08-16-2006, 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlynn

I would start a FACTA dispute with Palisades - to cover all your bases. How did you attempt to dispute it after your win?

It has been on my CR for several months
It read opened in NOv 2006 INSTALLMENT
W & A had it and I send CRRR DV's and never got anythnig back and then I sent for my CR and there it was.
I sent a letter to EX saying I disputed it as it was NOT MINE.
I really believed it was not, and there was no record of ATT in my history or that I could remember ever owing.
I got a new report and it came nack verifed and updated.
I AGAIN disputed ,this time it came back COMMENT FCBA dispute received consumer disagrees.
WHAT does this mean??
Then when I won my case, I disputed the third time and told them they were reporting inaccurate information and that the case was brought to court and they had no proof that this was my debt and it was dismissed with prejudice, and I want it off my report.
They told me that they would not investigate another dispute and to take it up with Palisades.
So I should think I have something on EX as well.
As of now it is still on there ,and I have not contacted Palisades,which after court and the lawyer PO'd I sincerely doubt they will take it off.
I never have done a FACTA,
So ???? : )
ILMD

ilovemydogs · 08-16-2006, 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by centex

If the TL was not placed until AFTER their suit was dismissed WITH prejudice, then I would suggest that you might want to flesh out retaliation claims for your letter to the Palisades general counsel.

I don't remember what state you are in, but state law may also be something you want to look at, to include DTPA claims.

Although the dismissal with prejudice does not automatically mean the underlying debt had no merit, the question for Palisades is whether they want to have to justify their actions to a jury in light of the dismissal.

No, it was on before we went to court.
I am in Massachusetts.
So what should I do to get it off?
ILMD

ilovemydogs · 08-16-2006, 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlynn

While the underlying debt might have merit, wouldn't Palisades (specifically) claim the debt has merit by continued reporting be false?

I like this thinking jflynn : )
ILMD

centex · 08-16-2006, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ilovemydogs

No, it was on before we went to court.
I am in Massachusetts.
So what should I do to get it off?
ILMD

Wasn't Mass. one of those states that had some really interesting statutes pertaining to reporting? I remember some discussion over at AoC about a state on the East Coast that had a statute written in a fashion that all but made it impossible to report a collection matter by a third party.

ilovemydogs · 08-16-2006, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by centex

Wasn't Mass. one of those states that had some really interesting statutes pertaining to reporting? I remember some discussion over at AoC about a state on the East Coast that had a statute written in a fashion that all but made it impossible to report a collection matter by a third party.

Hmmmm I don't think it was Mass.,but I will do a search.
ILMD

jlynn · 08-16-2006, 01:11 PM

When you attempted to dispute with EX the third time, did you enclose a copy of the court order?

A FACTA dispute is IMHO a paper trail. You write Palisades directly a detailed dispute. (Forgive me, I'm a bit rusty, so someone can correct me) - while you are allowed now to dispute with the furnisher, and they must do something within 30 days (I think), however, there is no teeth in the statute if they DON'T follow thru, thus, its really a CYA letter if you ever need to resolve in a courtroom.

On a side note - the Palisades accounts that originated with AT & T were wireless accounts - they did a big buyout of them a while back, and really wrecked havoc with credit reports.

hannah · 08-16-2006, 01:11 PM

Wouldn't continuing to report a debt that didn't exist be an FDCPA violation as well?? We need to compose an ITS. I also suggest a drawing up a complaint to be heard in the same court in front of the same judge that dismissed it in the first place.

ilovemydogs · 08-16-2006, 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hannah

Wouldn't continuing to report a debt that didn't exist be an FDCPA violation as well?? We need to compose an ITS. I also suggest a drawing up a complaint to be heard in the same court in front of the same judge that dismissed it in the first place.

That would be in small claims court unfortunately.
I was thinking that I would have Palisades and Experian on several violations,hopefully : )
Oh and jflynn you are correct about cell phones.
Odd when we went to court the plantiffs lawyer when asked what type of phone account this was, said she thought it was a cell phone . IE THOUGHT!!! It was a win win from the beginning. Felt good.
ILMD

Qtip · 08-16-2006, 02:58 PM

The people at EX are arrogant sob's, there is nothing on the FCRA that say they have to limit your dispute to two per account.

I am surprized nobody has sued the living crap out of them for that bullshit policy.

hannah · 08-16-2006, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Qtip

The people at EX are arrogant sob's, there is nothing on the FCRA that say they have to limit your dispute to two per account.

I am surprized nobody has sued the living crap out of them for that bullshit policy.

There have been lawsuits over this very thing but the ones I found all settled with NDA's.

ilovemydogs · 08-16-2006, 04:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hannah

There have been lawsuits over this very thing but the ones I found all settled with NDA's.

Point me the way to do this.
ILMD

hannah · 08-16-2006, 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ilovemydogs

Point me the way to do this.
ILMD

I'll see if I can put an example together but first you need to post exactly what is being reported cause we need to find all the violations. Redact personal info.

ilovemydogs · 08-16-2006, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hannah

I'll see if I can put an example together but first you need to post exactly what is being reported cause we need to find all the violations. Redact personal info.

OK
Palisades Collection LLC
Partial account number
PaliATT XXXXX
Date Opened Nov 2005
Reported Since Feb 2006
Date of Status Feb 200
Last Reported June 2006
Type INSTALLMENT
Terms 1 MOnth
Monthly Payment NA
Responsibility Individual
Credit Limit or Original Amount $811
High Balance NA
Recent Balance $811
Status COLLECTION,Past Due as of June 2006
ACCOUNT HISTORY
Collection as of Feb 2006 to June 2006
Comment
FCBA dispute resolved Consumer Disagrees
The item was verified and updated June 2006
That was my LAST CR
I then went to dispute again AFTER my win and was told that they would not allow any more disputes, and to take it up with Palisades.
ILMD