KEEP YOUR WALLET IN YOUR POCKET! This May Be For You and Worth Thou$ands!

 

Many people who have read my blog posts or interacted with me over the years are well aware of my passion to help people who have been sabotaged by banks.  

Banks don't lend money. It's against the law for banks to lend money from their assets or their depositors' assets. The Federal Reserve Bank even admits it and did so under oath proudly.  Banks also don't lend credit. The Supreme Court has ruled many, many times that banks can't lend their credit.  

So, how are banks funding your credit cards, loans and mortgages?  They use legal documents called Promissory Notes, which are negotiable instruments. The documents are legal but their failure to disclose is illegal. When it comes to mortgages, they also bundle them up and sell them, and the loans are securitized. They are traded on the stock market as Mortgage Back Securities.  You are the beneficiary but you never get that disclosure nor the profit that is generated.

How would you like to receive thousands of dollars back from those mortgages - that belongs to you?

What if I could help you get thousands of dollars back on mortgages that have been "closed" whether it's closed from selling your house, refinancing that loan, even if you had to short sale it or it was foreclosed on?  

What if you could start the process without paying even 1 cent, or $1, or any money at all out of your pocket, but in 6-9 months you'd receive a check for roughly 25% of the original amount of that mortgage?  That's what I'm offering and I'd love to help you recover those funds.

💰 Did You Open a Mortgage in the Last 30 Years?

You Could Be Owed Thousands in Unclaimed Funds!

---

🏠 I want to help Homeowners Retrieve Money Tied to Their Past Mortgage.

Many people don’t realize that their old mortgage was packaged into mortgage-backed securities and traded on the market — creating profits you could be entitled to reclaim.

---

✅ You May Qualify If Your Mortgage Was:

✔ Paid Off
✔ Refinanced
✔ Foreclosed
✔ Short Sold
✔ Included in Bankruptcy

✔ Over $130,000

(loan modifications do not qualify).

---

📆 Must Have Been Opened Within the Last 30 Years

---

💡 We Handle Everything for You:

✔ Free Evaluation
✔ No Upfront Fees
✔ Easy, Confidential Process
✔ Legal & Secure Documentation

⚖️ Important Legal Disclosure:

This is a non-judicial, administrative recovery process.
✅ No court appearances required
✅ No civil or criminal actions involved
✅ 100% legal, safe, and secure

✅ No affect on a current mortgage or lender
✅ No negative bank interference.

---

What do I  need from you to start?

I need the name on the mortgage. It can be just one of the "borrowers"

I need the address of the mortgaged property (even if you refinanced and still live there)

I need the date of the mortgage signing

I need the amount of the mortgage.

If you don't know this info, you can easily look it up on Zillow in the loan history section. 

I will need you to email me and also please provide a phone number for me to reach you at to give you a bit of a consultation.  I'll contact you for the best date and time to call you.

Act quickly because we only submit every couple of months and we will be closing this submission off in a couple weeks.

To your good fortune,

Shannon Lopez
📧 futurefico@gmail.com

DON'T BLINDLY ACCEPT A CREDITOR OR COLLECTOR'S CLAIM OF VERIFICATION

 Have you been disputing with your creditors and collection agencies to correct their records and information they furnish to the credit reporting agencies only to receive a response that they have verified their records and the information will remain the same, with the bonus of a dispute comment being added?

Did they validate or prove their claim? In order to do that, they need to send the documentation to substantiate the correctness of the information they hold on you. Did they send that? Probably not. The most you usually get will be several months, possibly years of billing statements. Maybe part of a contract. Well, you won't get that from 3rd party collectors in most cases because they have no contract with you.  They may some portion of a contract from the alleged original creditor but not any with them.

So what do billing statements prove? Not a contract, nor a valid contract. They don't represent a full accounting. They don't represent anything you should be asking them to provide. Sometimes in my letters I specifically tell them NOT to send any billing statements because they don't prove anything I need to support their claim. They either don't read or don't give a rip because that's the most common thing I get other than a letter with a hearsay statement that their info is right.

So, they really don't prove their claim at all.  How about Verification. Do they actually verify their claim or just say they did because they are so used to lying? What they send you is "hearsay." I'll touch again on that in a moment but let's explore "Verification." 

I'm going to start with Black's Law Dictionary for a legal definition of Verification. Then I'll show you what the Federal Code defines Verification as being.

 Verification: Black's Law Dictionary "... averment that the party pleading is ready to establish the truth of what he has set forth." "The examination of a writing for the purpose of ascertaining its truth; or a certificate or affidavit that it is true."

The court said "Confirmation of the correctness, truth, or authenticity of a pleading, account, or other paper, by an affidavit, oath, or deposition." McDonald v. Rosengarten, 134 111. 126, 25 N. E. ; and Summerfield v. Phoenix Assur. Co. (C. C-) 65 Fed. 296; and Patterson v. Brooklyn, 6 App. Div. 127, 40 N.Y. Supp. 581.

It is swearing under oath that you can prove your claims.  When in court, who can testify as a witness?  The answer is, a person with FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE! 

Now let's see what the Federal Code says is needed for Verification:

28 USC 1746 – UNSWORN VERIFICATION

Wherever, under any law of the United States or under any rule, regulation, order, or requirement made pursuant to law, any matter is required or permitted to be supported, evidenced, established, or proved by the sworn declaration, verification, certificate, statement, oath, or affidavit, in writing of the person making the same (other than a deposition, or an oath of office, or an oath required to be taken before a specified official other than a notary public), such matter may, with like force and effect, be supported, evidenced, established, or proved by the unsworn declaration, certificate, verification, or statement, in writing of such person which is subscribed by him, as true under penalty of perjury, and dated, in substantially the following form:

(1)

If executed without the United States: “I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date).

(Signature)”.

(2)

If executed within the United States, its territories, possessions, or commonwealths: “I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date).

(Signature)”.

So, I would bet at least 99% of those reading this post that have ever received a response letter from a creditor, collector, or credit bureau claiming the information is verified has received a true verification. They don't dare state anything under Penalty of Perjury. That to me means they know they are lying to you and don't want that verification to be used against them in court.

Now back to hearsay. According to Black's Law Dictionary, verification is sworn testimony. Testimony must be based on one's first hand knowledge. Testimony must be supported by documentation. If you don't provide the documentation, then there's no supported testimony. If you have documentation but no sworn testimony, how do you know if the documents are accurate?  To avoid "hearsay," you need both the documentation AND the testimony.

Here's case law that clearly shows you that what you are receiving from these credit thugs is hearsay, unproven, not validated, and not verified:

“Testimony, whether live or in the form of an affidavit, to the effect that the witness has reviewed a loan file and that the loan file shows that the debtor is in default is hearsay and incompetent; rather, the records must be introduced after a proper foundation is provided.” New England Savings Bank v. Bedford Realty Corp., 238 Conn. 745, 680 A.2d 301, 308-09 (1996), later opinion, 246 Conn. 594, 717 A.2d 713 (1998); Cole Taylor Bank v. Corrigan, supra, 230 Ill.App.3d 122, 595 N.E.2d 177, 181 (2d Dist. 1992).

“It is the business records that constitute the evidence, not the testimony of the witness referring to them.” (In re A.B., 308 Ill.App. 3d 227, 719 N.E.2d 348 (2d Dist. 1999)

I like to tell these credit and collection companies that they forgot to provide the verification and forgot to provide the documentation they claim is accurate with their response, and therefore they haven't proven diddly squat. 

What you can take from this post is that they don't prove their claims, They don't validate, they don't verify. They lie, they slander you on your credit reports and you need to reject their claim until they provide the documented proof you are entitled to receive along with the sworn or unsworn verification, signed and dated under Penalty of Perjury. That's what the law says they need to do. That's what the courts have upheld that they need to do. You need to be stubborn on this. Keep all your records and be diligent. Hold your ground and refuse to accept their lies.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Have you been sued by a debt collector recently? We can help. You need to act fast.

Do you need help with credit repair? We can help. We have 2 programs. Full credit repair assistance and DIY credit repair assistance.  

Visit our Credit Repair and Lawsuit Services page if you're interested in getting the help you may need.

Click Here for Services page

How To Know If A Debt Collector Has Sent You Validation

 When a debt collection company sends you a letter telling you that you owe them for some alleged debt or you see a collection account on your credit reports, you should immediately fire off a letter to them exercising your right to dispute their claim and demand validation, What this means is you are telling them that they have to prove you owe them money and until they do, you have no obligation to pay them anything and until they validate (prove their claim), the law requires them to stop all collection activity.

Collection activity means phone calls to you or people they may think know you, letters to you claiming you owe them, furnishing, updating or verifying information on your credit reports, and even filing a lawsuit against you. This is why it is so important to demand validation from 3rd party collectors.

In your validation letter you need to tell them to send you certain items that will prove that you owe them money. It doesn't have to be a long list. It doesn't have to include outrageous things like proof that they complied with GAAP or items required under the Patriot Act, though you can actually request those items. But the most important items to request are things that prove there is a contract and proof of what they lent you and proof that they have the right to take the place of the alleged original creditor and even proof they have the right to furnish information on your credit reports.

Once you've demanded validation all collection activity should stop. I say "should" but that's not usually the case. Some will just notate the credit reports that the information they furnished is being disputed. Sometimes they add more nonsense like "resolved, consumer disagrees" or "dispute resolved, meets FCRA requirements" or something similar to that. Utter nonsense because they put that on there before they even send you something they claim to be validation.

So if they respond, do you know what qualifies as validation? Validation means the documentary evidence or proof. If you receive a copy of a contract you need to review the contract closely. It won't be a contract between you and their company because in most cases you haven't agreed to do business with them. I say "most cases" because some people sign payment plans with collection companies so they end up having a contract with them. But usually if they send a copy of a contract, it's between you and the alleged original creditor. This is what you need to read carefully. 

When you read any contract that they send you, look for their company name on that contract. You will see your name and maybe the alleged original company name and maybe another company name of  possibly a servicer or guarantor. You won't find the collection company name 99% of the time. So, this contract is not validation. 

The collection company may send you a bunch of monthly billing statements. You won't find the collection company's name on these billing statements. So whether they send you one billing statement or thirty or more billing statements, they aren't validation, They don't prove that they collection company lent anything to you or that you agreed to pay them money.

For medical collections, they may send you the admissions paper that has your signature on it. That form may say that you agree to be responsible and that if you don't pay the medical facility it may go to a collection company, If they don't specifically name the collection company that is claiming you owe them something, it is not validation. YOU have the right to choose who you do business with, If an alleged original creditor decides to sell your information to a 3rd party collection company, in order for it to be enforceable they have to get your permission In Writing PRIOR to the alleged original creditor releasing any of your personal identifying information or account information to them.  If they do this without your consent, it voids the alleged contract. (There's actually a lot going on behind the scenes that voids the alleged contract but this is a big obvious unlawful action),

So, when you get their claim that they Validated, which usually they wrongly claim they "Verified", you need to be all over that and respond to them claiming that you reject their attempt to validate because they neither verified their claim nor did they send the documented proof that shows you contracted to do business with them nor that they lent you anything, Reject their claim, remind them that the law requires them to stop all collection activity unless or until they actually validate (which they absolutely cannot do), and that they need to Cease & Desist until they validate and verify (sworn testimony - they can't do that either because they have no 1st hand knowledge), and make sure to remind them that anything other than removing their lies and slander from your credit reports is collection activity, and is a violation of the FDCPA and the FCRA and is actionable in a court of law. 

Good luck and go get 'em.

By the way, if you can or feel led to, please help support my family with funeral expenses for 4 of our family members. They all died one after the other in less than 30 days and we are not able to pay for all the expenses out of our own pockets.  We have to pay for all the funeral and burial costs before we can hold the services. So, we are grateful for any help you can give us. Please also share the information on your social media. I really thank all of you and appreciate your help and prayers at this time. 

Here is the link to the information about my family's situation right now. 

https://givesendgo.com/lopezfamilyfunerals

3 Common Errors On Credit Reports That Consumers Often Miss

 Many people attempt to repair their credit by mainly disputing negative information on their credit reports with the credit reporting agencies. I believe everyone that is trying to repair their credit needs to dispute with the credit bureaus/credit reporting agencies (CRA's). I also believe that disputes need to be sent directly to the furnishers of that negative information, that would be the alleged creditors and 3rd party collection agencies.  

Now when disputing with the CRA's, I hear and read that a lot of you are disputing "no contract" or something similar to that.  That is an honest, true, and factual claim or reason for the dispute but if you keep disputing like that, you're going to end up getting the dreaded "frivolous" letter. CRA's can send you that and tell you that they are no longer going to entertain any challenge from you on that disputed item. I believe they can ignore your dispute for the following 6 months. That will delay your progress if you get yourself into that situation.

What you need to do is to pick apart the information that is furnished and find every error you can because that is what you use to dispute and that's how you keep from getting the "frivolous" letter. You can dispute that you have no contract with the company but when they respond that it is verified, you shouldn't dispute the same thing again immediately afterwards.  To continue the dispute and keep fighting, you have to bring up another error you found on your credit report. 

Here are some things that maybe you forget to dispute or maybe didn't even realize you could dispute:  

*    Is there a notation on your report that you have disputed that information? Well, how long has that been on your credit report? It should only be on your report for up to 30 days because the courts have determined that 30 days is a reasonable amount of time to "verify" the accuracy and get back to you. So, if it says consumer disputes and then it says "consumer disagrees", well then contact them and say, if you provide the proof that it's been verified, send me the documentation. If it's proven that they are reporting accurately, then I'll agree.  I haven't received proof of diddly squat yet. You can't just say consumer disagrees and leave the "disputed" notation on my credit report, and you claim its "resolved" without sending me the proof.  Either you prove it or remove it! They can't say it meets FCRA guidelines either. The FCRA says they have to have it accurate, complete and verifiable or else it has to be removed. If it meets the requirements in the FCRA, then they should have sent you the proof, or corrected it, or sent you the sworn verification. Remind them of the definition of "Verification" from Black's Law Dictionary including the accompanying case law.

*    Do you have a charge off that shows a balance and also shows a past due amount? I have no doubt that there are multiple errors on this furnished information but the thing that stands out quite a bit to me is that on a charge off, there is not a "Past Due" amount, It's been charged off. It's no longer late. They can claim there's a balance but believe me, that is another error that they need to prove in order to force you to pay them. That's a topic for another time but for this post, don't forget to dispute this with the CRA's. This furnisher is claiming there is a past due amount on this alleged account but the law states that a charge off cannot have a past due amount. Correct or delete this immediately pursuant to the requirements in the FCRA.

*    This last one is a whammy that they all violate probably 95% or more of the time. The FCRA Requires that every alleged account that if furnished to a credit report also includes the DFD, or you can say the DLA. What do those acronyms stand for? Date of First Delinquency and Date of Last Activity. So, the DLA is the date you last made a payment on that account. The DFD is the first month that you missed a payment on the account prior to the account being charged off,  Why are these dates important? Because they are the key to knowing when the Statute of Limitations runs out for collecting and for reporting it on your credit reports. It should be no problem for an alleged original creditor to furnish accurate dates on your credit reports. You can look at your credit reports, all 3 bureaus side by side and you will see that each CRA report usually differs on each one.  I don't know that I've ever seen an accurate DLA or DFD on an alleged account furnished by a 3rd party collector. I will reiterate that this is a very important requirement stated right in the FCRA and also, there are FTC Staff opinion letters written about this common error and requirement.

Please take this information and apply it to your CRA disputes to hopefully start seeing some better results. It will protect you from getting slapped with a "Frivolous" violation and suspension of your ability to dispute, It will also help you find multiple errors to dispute and use against the furnishers and CRA's to make your credit reports pretty again,

If you've found this information useful, please consider donating through the "DONATE" button on the right hand side of this page. Also, please see the post I'm placing right below here. It has a link to GiveSendGo which is similar to GoFundMe but they don't steal people's money.  My family is going through a very rough time right now and we need all the help we can get. I really appreciate any help you can give whether it be financial, or sharing the link on your social media or your prayers. All of it is appreciated,

One more thing. I have been very busy the last couple of years, Busy with credit repair, busy with assisting clients with lawsuits, and health problems that landed me in the hospital for quite a while. After that, I decided that I would be scaling back my credit repair services and concentrate much more on teaching others how to fix their own credit and also training credit repair companies how to have more successes for their clients.

I have been working hard on this training and will be posting some more information about it soon. I'm almost ready to launch it so if you're interested in learning even more that what you can find here on my blog, come back often and when I announce it, you can sign up at that time. Thank you and best wishes on your credit repair success,

Here is the link to the information about my family's situation right now. 

https://givesendgo.com/lopezfamilyfunerals

Please help by donating and/or sharing. We have 4 funerals that we need to pay for before we can hold the services. Thank you so much for helping us. Here is the link to donate. https://givesendgo.com/lopezfamilyfunerals

Shannon Lopez

ttiFebr4uary S24 una1oi2ti 211a:53 frelPMd  · 

Shared with Public

As some of you may know, we recently lost 4 of my husband's family members. We are comforted knowing that they loved our Lord Jesus Christ and are no longer suffering with pain or struggling to breathe. They are in Heaven worshiping and praising God now.

However, now we need some assistance covering the costs of burying our loved ones. I am asking for help both financially and/or by sharing the link to GiveSendGo as we cannot hold our funeral and burial services for them without everything being fully paid.

I'm including the link below and really appreciate any help you can give. Thank you for your prayers and support.

https://givesendgo.com/lopezfamilyfunerals

Why Charge Offs Shouldn't Be Paid

Many times when I review clients' credit reports I see paid charge offs.  My stomach gets a sick feeling every time. Paying off a charge off might help the score a bit because it changes the balance to zero, improves the debt ratio, and potential creditors like seeing that the alleged debt was paid, but it's still a derogatory account and will always be a derogatory account.

The truth is, that creditor has already been paid for that charge off, even before it was charged off, but they never told you.  These creditors always fail to fully disclose every important aspect of credit accounts. That voids the contract. It voids the account. The account and contract were never valid because of fraud and lack of disclosure by the creditor.

One thing these creditors fail to disclose is that the account is insured to protect them from loss of asset due to default or other credit loss.  Did you know that? Did they disclose that to you?  They're supposed to. In over 30 years of doing credit repair, I have only seen the disclosure 1 time.  ONE TIME, and that was years ago.  Haven't seen any disclosures in probably over 15 years or so.

I'll explain the insurance in a bit but here are some other things they don't disclose.  They don't disclose that they are prohibited from lending you money from their assets or their depositors' assets.  They are prohibited from lending you their credit. They are lending you your own money that you first lent them, which means that you funded the account that you are using to shop or spend. They are converting paper (your application, service agreement, loan papers) into negotiable instruments and depositing them into the newly created account to fund the account and essentially lend them money.

The National Bank Act of 1864 and National Banking Act of 1933 are where you can find the regulation that states these financial institutions cannot lend money from their assets or their depositors' assets.  Supreme court case law repeatedly has ruled that these financial institutions cannot lend their credit.  Here are a few cases but there are many, many cases that uphold this. 

"A national bank has no power to lend its credit to any person or corporation…" Bowen v. Needles Nat. Bank, 94 F 925 36 CCA 553, certiorari denied in 20 S.Ct 1024, 176 US 682, 44 LED 637.

First National Bank v. National Exchange Bank 29 U.S. 122, 128

California Bank v. Kennedy 167 U.S. 362, 367

Concord Bank v. Hawkins 174 U.S. 364

You will find the requirements related to the insurance banks have for each account in 15 USC Section 1605.  Let's talk about this insurance and how it supports my opinion that charge off's should not be paid after the fact by the consumer.

FDIC rules require creditors to charge off written contracts at 120 days of default and revolving credit accounts at 180 days of default.  However, creditors can file a claim against the insurance for a credit account at 90 days of default.  That's 30 to 90 days prior to when that creditor is allowed to charge off the account.

Once the insurance claim is launched the creditor shortly thereafter receives the money to pay off the balance of the account which they claimed is a loss of asset.  Please tell me, whose loss of asset was really affected?  Not the creditor because they didn't have any skin in the game.  How can I say that?

Remember I stated that these financial institutions are converting paper (agreements, applications, etc.) into negotiable instruments.  Well, they don't own these negotiable instruments.  They belong to the consumer whose name is signed on the bottom. Under Title 12, negotiable instruments are to be treated as CASH!  Whose cash?  The consumer's cash.  That is what is deposited into the newly created account. That is what funds the account.  The CONSUMER funds the account, not the creditor, so the consumer should be the recipient of the insurance payment, not the creditor who has not lost a dime!

But let's go over the insurance and charge off actions. Since they get a payoff for the insurance claim they place for the "default" , the balance is paid off.  Why then do they charge off the account 90 days later, when the default timeline hits 180 days (or 120 for written contracts)? The balance was paid off by the insurance so there is no amount left to charge off.  Did you ever think about that if you knew about the insurance?  

Since the consumer funded the account and continued to deposit more money in the form of "payments" and the creditor never lent any money or credit since that's forbidden by law, and then the creditor swipes the insurance payment by fraudulently claiming they are experiencing asset loss, why do they need to charge the account off?  The insurance paid it off. In reality, the account was paid as agreed from the get go by the consumer and credit reports should reflect that.

But since these liars will never report the truth and will not correct the record, the consumer needs to not give them more money by paying a charge off but instead, demand that they prove their claim. Demand that they prove they lent something, that there was equal risk and full disclosure, and a truly valid contract.  Since they cannot provide that, put the squeeze on them and remove that bad account from your credit, get them to close their file, and work on rebuilding your credit without paying that derogatory, false account that is void and was void from the origination of the account due to an invalid contract, fraudulently created by them, the fake creditor.

Hopefully this sinks in and you will stop and think about how they are trying to dupe you, before you pay off a charge off that you do not owe.  

If you like this content and find it useful for you or someone you know, please think about making a donation to support continued content to help you fight your credit fight.  Thank you in advance!

Raise It or You Waive It

Whether you are disputing information regarding a derogatory account from a creditor or an alleged account with a 3rd party collector, you need to be specific about what is wrong with how they are reporting that item on your credit report.  You need to raise the issues in your dispute letters and hold them accountable to prove it.

With an original creditor, you will most likely be disputing the amount of the balance they claim is owed after they charge it off.  Here are some thing you should be disputing:

• There is no balance because they claim to have charged off the account and it is a FACT that there is insurance on each account to protect the creditor  against asset loss.  Did they receive monies from an insurance claim that paid off the alleged account balance?
• Did they even fund the account or did you?  
• Did they take tax credits?
• Are they the creditor or really just the servicer?
• Did they disclose that they were charging you for the insurance premium to protect against asset loss?
• Did they get your approval in writing agreeing to the amount of the premium as require by law?
• Did they get the insurance payoff prior to charging off the account?
• Is the contract creating the account even valid since they lacked full disclosure and equal risk?
• Do they even have a certified copy of the original contract bearing both your signature and their authorized representative's signature?
• Can they provide a full accounting showing every charge, every payment, every fee, every interest charge, every credit -including the insurance claim monies received, and any other amount along with the date each event occurred? *This does not mean they get to send you monthly billing statements. They need a full history document).

All of these questions are threatening to an "original creditor" because if they are truthful, they will have to admit that the contract was not valid, they lent you nothing, you covered the premium for the insurance for their benefit, the insurance paid off the account prior to charging off the account, and YOU funded the account, not them.  They need to respond point by point on each issue raised and provide documentation for everything they claim. Plus, verification requires a sworn affidavit, so that's how you need to tell them to respond.

With a 3rd party collector you should be raising some of these issues if not all of them:

• Were you named on the original contract with the original creditor?
• If not, do you have a contract between your company and me, signed by both parties?
• If not, produce the document authorizing the release of my information from the original creditor to you (Power of Attorney), signed by me. It is against the law for a creditor to share your information to any party other than the account holder without their authorization. Giving your information to a 3rd party without your knowledge or consent is perpetrating identity theft,
• Do you have first hand knowledge about everything that has transpired with the alleged account, including when the account allegedly belonged to the original creditor and any other parties prior to your acquisition?
• Do you have written consent to collect information about me and to share information about me with the credit reporting agencies - in writing, signed by me? 

When you receive a response back and it doesn't respond to each issue raised and doesn't include certified documentation backing up each response, you must call them out on their failure to validate.  Again, verification is the sworn testimony so they also should be responding to you in that format. Validation is the documentation backing up their testimony. One without the other is hearsay and inadmissible.

You always need to respond to their response and raise the point that they did NOT provide the answers and documentation you requested. You need to raise the point that they did not respond with a sworn affidavit of verification. They failed to validate. They failed to prove their claim. They are in default in their response/lack of response to the dispute and issues raised.  If you do not respond and call them out, you waive your right to claim they did not prove you owe them or that there is a valid contract.

I ALWAYS include the Maxim of Law - Silence Equates to Acquiescence (Agreement) in each of my letters.  This tells them that if they don't address even one item as requested, they agree that your statement of fact is true.  It is part of your full disclosure to them that you require a response and lack of receiving what is requested or demanded from them proves you owe them nothing.

So raise your disputes. Don't remain silent. Always be the last to respond until they respond that they are removing the item from your credit report and closing the alleged account.

If you need assistance with credit repair and want an expert on your side, contact me for an audit of your reports and consultation to go over what needs to be done for your credit and pricing plans that can get you up and running quickly.  Just a reminder that Future Fico is a non-profit so your service costs are donations that are tax deductible for you!

Contact me today!

Fighting Collections - They Are All Fraudulent!

I'm going to warn you right from the start that this is going to be a fairly long post. But I believe it will be an easy read and you will learn some very important information. Some of it may seem unbelievable but I assure you that it is true. Look, I've been doing this for over 31 years now. I can prove what I'm saying and I have proven it in court for quite a few of my lawsuit clients.  So grab your munchies and something to drink and let's start class!

It amazes me that people pay collection companies when they really don't owe the debt. Maybe they feel they have a moral obligation or they are stressed out and think paying them is the only way to make them go away. Maybe they've been convinced that they owe it and no one has taught them the truth about collections. Maybe it's a combination of the above, or all of the above, or some other reason that makes sense to them. Almost no reason makes sense to me.

Talking about collections with me makes me just go off, spewing out one fact after another and sometimes I get so riled up I get potty mouth. Yep, I do blow it occasionally when it comes to collections. Their fraudulent behavior and bullying, harassment, lies and stubbornness sometimes sets me off.  I'm going to teach you about collections today and I promise I will try my hardest to keep my words clean so as to not offend anyone or put bad language in front of youngsters that may read this.

Let's start from the beginning and we'll assume the original account is a credit card account, (but this scenario applies to most types of collection accounts including medical, utilities, insurance, cable/telecommunication accounts as well).

When you are approved for a credit card account, you are given plastic and a credit limit. When you spend using that card, the bank/card issuer convinces you that they lent you money/credit limit for you to spend. But that's not the truth. Banks are not allowed to lend money from their assets nor their depositors' assets.  It's also completely illegal to lend credit.  So now that you know that banks can't lend money or credit, what are they lending you?  The answer is NOTHING! 

What actually happens is that credit card agreement with your signature becomes a negotiable instrument. Your signature gives it energy and value. Title 12 instructs banks to treat negotiable instruments as cash. In accounting, a bank treats it as "cash equivalent" and that means that YOU FUNDED THE ACCOUNT!  The instrument has your signature on it. You own it. But they NEVER disclose that to you. You are actually making a loan to the bank but they trick you and convince you that they lent you something, totally ignoring that you were the one lending something.

Let's skip over to contract law for a moment. In order for a contract to be valid, there are 4 main elements, in addition to being bilateral - meaning 2 signatures, 1 from each party. The 4 essential elements are Offer, Acceptance (you have these two in your contracts), FULL DISCLOSURE, and EQUAL RISK. Your credit card account contract is missing the last 2 essential elements for a valid contract.

To have full disclosure, they would need to inform and advise and disclose to you that YOU are the one who is funding the account. They would have to disclose to you that the account is going to be insured in case of asset loss for the bank's favor and that you will be paying the insurance premium for that asset loss insurance (known as "credit default swap"), and get your written consent to the amount of the premium. They would need to disclose that they will most likely only service the account and transfer "ownership" to a special purpose vehicle such as an asset backed trust. They would need to disclose that this is securitization and that by separating the payment stream from the note, the contract is void. 

To have equal risk, both parties must have something to lose. What do the banks have to lose? They don't lend anything. They are insured against loss, they sell it and transfer it, they get tax credits. WHAT DO THEY HAVE TO LOSE? The only thing I can think of is insane amounts of illegal profits that they really aren't entitled to. But really that doesn't fit either because they insure everything! They can't lose!  Anyhow, I hope I've explained why the banks don't really have a valid contract.

Now, moving on to the creation of collection accounts and the fraudulent nature of them. 

You have your credit card account and you're using it and paying it regularly and consistently and then something happens that causes you to be late. You get hit with fees. You catch it up and use and pay and use and pay but you get to a point where you just can't keep up with the payments and you default on your agreement. The account gets further and further behind. So you try to work something out with them but still you can't keep up.

Let's say you asked me to try to talk to them about the account. So I call them up and say that I want to discuss account number  1234XXXX, and see what can be done to save the account and get back on track.  They ask me if I am Mary Doe and I tell them, no, I'm Shannon, Mary's friend, or sister, or whatever. They will then tell me that they cannot discuss the account with me or anyone except Mary unless she has given specific authorization or a Power of Attorney to speak with them on her behalf.  This is important to understand. They CANNOT share any information about Mary's account with me or ANY PERSON (corporations are also defined as a "person") without a request, agreement, authorization, or Power of Attorney specifically naming that person as authorized to communicate and receive her account information. THIS IS IMPORTANT!

Well Mary can't catch up the account and at 180 days, the bank needs to remove it from their books and they charge it off.  But wait! Remember that they insured that account in case of loss due to default or other credit/asset loss?  They never tell you this but at approximately 90 days, they are allowed to file an insurance claim for that asset loss. The insurance company then issues a check for the amount of loss they claim they will or have incurred. The account is now PAID OFF IN FULL.  Remember who paid the insurance premium?  That's right, it was you - whether you knew it or not you were charged the premium and you paid it. Or maybe I should say your negotiable instrument paid it. 

That insurance payoff happened at approximately 90 days of default. Remember I told you that the banks charge off the account at 180 days? That charged off amount is the balance they report to the credit bureaus, or an amount near the amount of the charged off amount. IT'S A HUGE LIE!  The account was paid off by insurance that YOU paid for. The balance is $0! They charged off NOTHING! Scam! Fraud! Lies! Schemers!  Your credit reports should ALWAYS show the charged off account has a $0 balance. Oh heck no! It shouldn't even be a charge off. You paid off that account in full at approximately 90 days of default. And that's not even taking into consideration that you funded the stinking account in the first place so you never really were in default and didn't even need insurance to pay it off. I swear! Now you know why I get so worked up. But oh, it doesn't end there.

When they do their charge off of the account, next they recoup some more money by filing a Profit and Loss on their taxes. This allows them to take a deduction or receive a credit for that asset loss.  Funny how they conveniently forget that they never lent a dime, never lost a dime, actually made money (from your payments and insurance payouts), and still benefit from the P&L. You'll see that P&L on your credit reports quite often under "Account Status." 

Now that they've squeezed out as much money for that account as possible for the time being, they use the credit reports to try to extort that fake balance out of you. Some people fall for it and you will see a Paid Charge Off on the credit reports. Many times people pay them because of the threat of being sued. Oh the greed of the banks!  

Banks don't always hold onto charged off accounts. Sometimes they crunch the numbers and figure that it's more beneficial to sell off the charged off accounts. This is where the 3rd party collection company enters the picture. They usually bundle up a lot of charged off accounts and sell them as debt portfolios.  Then "debt buyers" purchase them. I really hate the title of "Debt Buyers." They don't buy debt, they buy YOUR INFORMATION.

Now please recall the little scenario of me trying to talk to the bank on Mary's behalf. Do you remember why they wouldn't talk to me or anyone else about her account?  They, by law, cannot share any information with any person without Mary's consent. They can't share info or communicate or negotiate without her authorization or a Power of Attorney, or an agreement such as a company stepping in and paying off the account  for which she would have contracted to now pay them. An example of this would be similar or the same as a refinance.

When banks sell off their portfolios of charged off accounts to a 3rd party collection company or misnamed "debt buyer," they are selling the account information only, because remember, the account has not only been paid off by insurance, but also charged off and received tax credits. But, they NEVER contact the account holders and get their consent to share that information  with any other party. They do it behind your back! They do it without your consent and without your knowledge.

I declare that this is collusion between banks and collection companies to perpetrate identity theft on account holders.  Collection companies get these accounts, create new accounts that you know nothing about then send you a bill claiming you owe them. Wait!  Where's the contract? Contract law requires a valid bilateral agreement between you and another party. It requires offer and acceptance. When dealing with a collection company, there is No upfront offer and acceptance. There is no full disclosure - they ALL know that the true account balance is $0 and I've confirmed that with a broker for debt portfolios. They KNOW! Lastly, it's obvious that there is NO EQUAL  RISK! It is impossible to have a valid contract with these debt collectors. It is also highly likely that collection accounts are insured as well. I'd guess that I'm about 95% sure of it.

WHAT A HUGE SCAM ON CONSUMERS! GRRRR!  I know some of you are feeling what I feel when discussing this huge fraud on consumers. It's an outrage!  It's intentional and willful and corrupt.

I'm not advocating not paying your bills because it all starts off with a failure to disclose, no real lending, no truly valid contract, etc. I believe that in this society, you have to play the credit game in order to achieve the American dream of home ownership and purchasing cars, or personal loans, renting a place to live or renting a car, turning on utilities, getting insurance, getting a cell phone, or whatever. You need good credit to obtain additional credit or financing for major purchases. I'm just  wanting you to be aware and awake. I just want you to understand about collections and learn to fight back. I don't ever advise anyone to pay a collection account though. It's all a sham. 

Demand validation of these collectors. Demand they produce a valid contract. Demand they produce a signed authorization. They shouldn't be on your credit report for any reason but since they are, they certainly should not be there without an authorization to collect information and make communications about you and an alleged account. They can NEVER truly validate. There is no valid contract and there is no POA or signed authorization. They've never lent anything to you. They are not named on original contracts with original creditors so they don't even qualify to subrogate/substitute themselves on to a contract. They have no interest to protect. They haven't been aggrieved and are not entitled to seek redress. 

I hope you've learned a lot from this post. I hope it gets you fired up to fight back. I hope the information helps you to see success against these 3rd party collectors to get them off your credit reports and out of your lives! 

If you have collection accounts that you need off your credit reports and you don't want to take on the fight alone, contact me because I love my work. I love fighting to get these thugs off your reports and out of your lives.