Years ago, I signed up in the Columbia House record club and when I signed up, I distinctly remember on the forms that I had no time limit to purchase all of my required CDs. I bought a few, but I still have 2 left to purchase and it’s been years since my last purchase. They sent me a threatening letter, and most recently a bill in the amount of forty-some-odd dollars (interestingly this is the price of 2 CDs, including shipping. Go figure…).
Anyway, does anyone know if this would go to a collection agency and put a bad mark on my credit if I do not pay them? I’m sure someone here has had this experience. I plan on calling them to complain, but I don’t know how much good that would do.
Yes, they can and will do this if they feel they are correct and you cannot prove a positive defense. Whether or not it “ruins” your credit depends the credit history of your other accounts. If one makes a habit of entering into agreements and not fulfilling them, then future creditors will want to know about this.
i can’t see how they can affect your credit unless you actually borrow money from them which isn’t the case when you sign up for CH. Did you give them your SS#?
They can affect your credit the same way any other creditor can, by reporting bad debt to a credit bureau. You don’t have to borrow money from someone to be a debtor and for them to be a creditor. A creditor is anyone to whom you owe money. Don’t pay a hospital bill? The hospital is your creditor. Don’t pay a parking ticket? The city is your creditor. Don’t fulfill your contract with Colombia House? Colombia House is your creditor. A creditor doesn’t need to have your SSN to report the debt.
But that does not seem to apply to House, because there was no time limit on the agreement. He simply hasn’t gotten around to buying those other 2 CDs yet.
If CH does put a negative remark on the credit report, House can dispute it, and his side of the story will also become part of the credit report.
Are you positive on this ** Otto**? I’m not even close to being an expert so I’d certainly concede to you on any point, but I’ve seen my credit report and have many unpaid accounts similar to CH and have never seen one on my credit report.
KidCharlemagne, I think you and Otto are both correct. Note that Otto merely said that they can report you to the credit agency. In actual practice, I doubt it happens too often, especially if they don’t have your SS#.
Anyone to whom you owe money can potentially report you as a bad debtor. Whether or not any particular creditor reports you is at the discretion of the creditor. My company reports (through working with collection agencies who do the actual reporting) any outstanding account of $25 or more. Anythin less than that we don’t feel its worth the time and expense to pursue. After a particularly bad patch in my life I’ve had derogatory items on my credit report from sources as diverse as hospitals, cable companies, utilities, credit cards and municipal governments (for unpaid tickets).
How much damage one derogatory account on an individual report will cause will vary depending on what else is on the report. If there is no other derogatory information and if there are positive accounts from credit cards, car loans, mortgages, etc. then one bad report will probably not have that much of an effect. OTOH, I work with collection accounts in my job and I have had people call me up claiming that they are unable to refinance their homes because of one derogatory report from us.
We do not need to have SSN to report the account. If we happen to have it this makes it easier to be sure that the right “Joseph Jones” is being reported but it’s not necessary to the process.
You can review the Fair Credit Reporting Act for the rights of creditors to report and the rights of debtors to dispute information.
Thanks a lot for all of your replies. Eleusis, you have put my mind a little more at ease. I always figured it would be hard to put that on my credit report even though it’s not money that was borrowed from them.
I signed up in the Columbia House record club and when I signed up, I distinctly remember on the forms that I had no time limit to purchase all of my required CDs.
There’s your problem right there. That may have been how it was, but that’s not how Columbia House operates today. I believe you have to fulfill your CD purchase within 2 or 3 years.
And Columbia House probably invoked that wonderful “We reserve the right to change the terms of service of this agreement” clause that was most likely on that form as well.
I was a member of Columbia House several years ago, and there was definately a time-limit clearly stated in the plan. I believe it’s always operated that way. If the time was indefinate, then it wouldn’t be very profitable.
I’m a bit disappointed in the attitude displayed by these posts. I’ve often been struck at how honest and forthright SDMB posters are, but this has not been borne out in this case.
The solution to House’s problem is obvious: buy the remaining two CD’s, pay them, and be done with it. Face it: you owe the money. I’m not making light of your situation, but you do owe the money. If you’re having a cash-flow problem, call and explain it to them. They may not care, but you owe them an explanation, if not the actual money.
You may not like the terms of a Columbia House agreement, but you are free not to sign it. I don’t think that Eluesis is offering the best example here, and I’m a bit disappointed, House, that you seem to be wanting to take the same tack. Just because you can get away with something doesn’t mean that you should.
How ever House seems to be following the terms of his orginal contract (ie he has an indefinite amount of time to buy the other two cds). I belive Columbia House to be in the wrong, they are the ones not following the contract House signed.
I have a friend who purposefully screws with them and the BMG version. He states that CD sales through these record clubs are considered “promotion” on most artist contracts and do not generate royalties for them, or count toward total sales. He’s in the music industry, so I guess he feels this is a way of “getting back” at the Big 5. He, too, is fastidious about his credit, and claims no harm has been done, despite the dunning notices.