# Credit dispute/deletion - their next move?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/credit-dispute-deletion-their-next-move/459262
**Category:** Factual Questions
**Created:** [August 8, 2008, 3:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/credit-dispute-deletion-their-next-move/459262 "2008-08-08T03:44:43Z")
**Posts on this page:** 10
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@Queen\_Bruin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Queen_Bruin)
#### Post date: [August 8, 2008, 3:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/credit-dispute-deletion-their-next-move/459262/1 "2008-08-08T03:44:43Z")
My husband’s credit report had a negative account on it which turned out to be the work of a shady local business (they’re under investigation now by the LA Sheriff’s dept. for what they did to him - the story is long and convoluted). He disputed the charge through all three credit bureaus and all three of them deleted the account. My question is, what is the alleged original debtor’s next move? Can they sell the debt to another collection agency? Do they have any recourse at all?
---
### Author:  [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)
#### Post date: [August 8, 2008, 12:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/credit-dispute-deletion-their-next-move/459262/2 "2008-08-08T12:55:00Z")
[QUOTE=Queen Bruin]
My husband’s credit report had a negative account on it which turned out to be the work of a shady local business (they’re under investigation now by the LA Sheriff’s dept. for what they did to him - the story is long and convoluted). He disputed the charge through all three credit bureaus and all three of them deleted the account. My question is, what is the alleged original debtor’s next move? Can they sell the debt to another collection agency? Do they have any recourse at all?
[/QUOTE]
Getting the debt removed from the credit report doesn’t erase it. The shady local business (“slb”) could still sue him on the debt. If it did, he’d need to respond to the lawsuit. \*\*pravnik \*\* has some great links on zombie debts that I don’t have time to hunt for right now, but that’s another issue. The slb could sell the debt or send it off to a collection agency. It could wind up back on the credit report, which would require an additional round of disputes to remove it again.
Depending on the circumstances, any or all of these activities might give your husband a right to sue the offending party.
---
### Author:  [@pravnik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pravnik)
#### Post date: [August 8, 2008, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/credit-dispute-deletion-their-next-move/459262/3 "2008-08-08T19:00:02Z")
Hi, **Gfactor** IM’d me. Basically what **GFactor** said. They could do nothing, or attempt to sue you on the debt, or turn it over to a collection agency, or sell it to a third party who buys “zombie debts” by the thousands for pennies on the dollar and attempts to sue people on them long after the statute of limitations has run. Save any and all documentation you have disputing the debt or regarding the shady local business, including their run-ins with the law, and I mean really save it, long term. If you’re harassed by a collection agency, see an attorney experienced in consumer debt law, as they may be in violation of the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act or your state’s debt collection law. If you’re ever served with a lawsuit, see such an attorney pronto. Many people attempt to answer the suit themselves, end up messing up something crucial, and getting a default judgment on them.
[‘Zombie’ debt is hard to kill](http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/SavingandDebt/ManageDebt/ZombieDebtCollectorsDigUpYourOldMistakes.aspx)
[Sleazy new debt-collector tactics](http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/SavingandDebt/ManageDebt/SleazyNewDebtCollectorTactics.aspx)
Not meant to be constued as legal advice. I’m not you’re attorney, you’re not my client. For legal advice, consult an attorney in your jurisdiction.
---
### Author:  [@Queen\_Bruin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Queen_Bruin)
#### Post date: [August 8, 2008, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/credit-dispute-deletion-their-next-move/459262/4 "2008-08-08T21:07:20Z")
**pravnik** , **Gfactor** , thank you both. We were thinking of getting an attorney anyways but now I believe we will \*definitely \*be getting an attorney.
One minor but possibly important detail that I neglected to mention: the business had actually already sold the debt to a collection agency before the dispute (that is, we disputed the collection account put on by the CA rather than the shady company, although we attempted to resolve things with the slb directly). Can they sell the debt to a CA more than once?
Thanks again.
NM, I read the article you linked - it looks like they can.
---
### Author:  [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)
#### Post date: [August 8, 2008, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/credit-dispute-deletion-their-next-move/459262/5 "2008-08-08T21:59:16Z")
Yes.
---
### Author:  [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)
#### Post date: [August 9, 2008, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/credit-dispute-deletion-their-next-move/459262/6 "2008-08-09T15:00:02Z")
not to hijack the thread, but let’s say that a person stopped paying on a debt in June, 2004. The debt was assigned to a law firm in April, 2006.
Should TWO separate entries appear on the report for the same debt? Should the 7 year period start from 2004 or 2006?
---
### Author:  [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)
#### Post date: [August 9, 2008, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/credit-dispute-deletion-their-next-move/459262/7 "2008-08-09T16:23:42Z")
[QUOTE=jtgain]
not to hijack the thread, but let’s say that a person stopped paying on a debt in June, 2004. The debt was assigned to a law firm in April, 2006.
Should TWO separate entries appear on the report for the same debt? Should the 7 year period start from 2004 or 2006?
[/QUOTE]
> [@](#):
>
> (c) Running of reporting period
> (1) In general
> The 7-year period referred to in paragraphs (4) and (6) of subsection (a) of this section shall begin, with respect to any delinquent account that is placed for collection (internally or by referral to a third party, whichever is earlier), charged to profit and loss, or subjected to any similar action, upon the expiration of the 180-day period beginning on the date of the commencement of the delinquency which immediately preceded the collection activity, charge to profit and loss, or similar action.
[15 U.S. Code § 1681c - Requirements relating to information contained in consumer reports | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute](http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/15/usc_sec_15_00001681---c000-.html)
In the case you describe, there should be just one entry (there are other cases where two might appear). As you can see from the statute, the 7 years begins to run 180 days after the commencement of the delinquency, so actually November or December 2004 is the right timeframe for the 7 years to begin running. Transferring the debt does not restart the clock, although unscrupulous collection agencies will try this trick, which is called “re-aging.” The provision I quoted was adopted to make re-aging illegal.
> **[Advisory Opinion to Amason (02-15-00)](https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/advisory-opinions/advisory-opinion-amason-02-15-00)**
>
> February 15, 2000 Ms. Alaina K. Amason 14155 Shire Oak San Antonio, TX 78247 Dear Ms. Amason:
> **[Advisory Opinion to Kosmerl (06-04-99)](https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/advisory-opinions/advisory-opinion-kosmerl-06-04-99)**
>
> June 4, 1999 Mr. Jeff Kosmerl 949 Ormewood Terrace Atlanta, Georgia 30316 Dear Mr. Kosmerl:
> **[Advisory Opinion to Gillespie (03-10-98)](https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/advisory-opinions/advisory-opinion-gillespie-03-10-98)**
>
> March 10, 1998 Ms. Terri Gillespie THE LeMANS GROUP 455 South Gulph Road King of Prussia, PA 19406 Re: Section 623(a)(5) of the FCRA Dear Ms. Gillespie:
> **[Advisory Opinion to Harvey (12-23-97)](https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/advisory-opinions/advisory-opinion-harvey-12-23-97)**
>
> December 23, 1997 Jack Harvey, III Regulatory Analyst ALLTEL Information Services Financial Services Division 4001 Rodney Parham Road Little Rock, AR 72212-2496
[http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2004/05/ncogroup.shtm](http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2004/05/ncogroup.shtm)
> **[Advisory Opinion to Johnson (08-31-98)](https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/advisory-opinions/advisory-opinion-johnson-08-31-98)**
>
> August 31, 1998 Mr. Clifford A. Johnson 1917 Surrey Trail Bellbrook, Ohio 45305 Re: FCRA §§ 605(c) and 623(a)(5) - "Commencement of the delinquency"
> **[CreditBoards](https://creditboards.com/forums/index.php?autocom=faq&CODE=02&qid=37)**
Of course if the law firm sues you and gets a judgment, that’s covered by a different provision of the FCRA, will show up as a separate entry on the credit report in the public records section, and will remain there for at least seven years:
> [@](#):
>
> (2) Civil suits, civil judgments, and records of arrest that, from date of entry, antedate the report by more than seven years or until the governing statute of limitations has expired, whichever is the longer period.
[http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode15/usc\_sec\_15\_00001681---c000-.html](http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode15/usc_sec_15_00001681---c000-.html)
---
### Author:  [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)
#### Post date: [August 9, 2008, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/credit-dispute-deletion-their-next-move/459262/8 "2008-08-09T16:47:14Z")
[QUOTE=Gfactor]
In the case you describe, there should be just one entry (there are other cases where two might appear).
[/QUOTE]
Thanks, once again. Which entry should NOT be listed? Is it the original one, or the one assigned to the law firm?
---
### Author:  [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)
#### Post date: [August 9, 2008, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/credit-dispute-deletion-their-next-move/459262/9 "2008-08-09T17:35:09Z")
I’m not sure it matters which “one” as much as it matters that there not be two. If they’ve merely retained a law firm to collect the debt, that hardly merits a second tradeline. So it’s possible the referral would be documented on the credit report as part of the first tradeline. If the debt is sold, that usually shows up as a separate tradeline with related amendments to the original.
Of course, under the section I cited before, if the law firm files a lawsuit, the filiing of the case can be reported as a civil suit in the public records section of the credit report. I’ve never seen a pending lawsuit reported, but it’s a possibility.
---
### Author:  [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)
#### Post date: [August 9, 2008, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/credit-dispute-deletion-their-next-move/459262/10 "2008-08-09T18:53:32Z")
[QUOTE=Gfactor]
In the case you describe, there should be just one entry (there are other cases where two might appear). As you can see from the statute, the 7 years begins to run 180 days after the commencement of the delinquency, so actually November or December 2004 is the right timeframe for the 7 years to begin running. Transferring the debt does not restart the clock, although unscrupulous collection agencies will try this trick, which is called “re-aging.” The provision I quoted was adopted to make re-aging illegal.
[/QUOTE]
Right, re-aging is more common than you’d think and is one reason why you have to watch your credit reports carefully.