Drive fast, live hard, no regrets... Sorry Penske

[notcasesensitive]

So, I know you are all dying to help me out more with my Credit-Impaired Ex-Husband and resulting credit woes, so here it is:

Bank is saying that they made some efforts to contact me (calls to some number they had on file 6 years ago or whatever) and that the only way this comes off my credit is if I pay off entire amount. I may have a couple of months to do so, we haven't really gone into specifics because I did not agree on the phone that I would do so.

I'm 99% sure that they did not follow the letter of the state fair credit reporting law, which requires the mailing of notice w/i 30 days of putting something on my account. I need t owait to see the letter that they claim they mailed in July that I never received to confirm.

I could also settle the debt with them for less, I'm sure, but a write-off/settled claim will be on my credit for the next 7 years or whatever (I know I can send in a comment, but the effect on my overall score is what matters to this needs-to-rent-an-apartment-soon chick).

I can go after ex and get a judgment, and maybe even garnishment of wages at his new job that is supposed to solve all his credit woes. I'd guess, given the way he spends money as compared to the way he earns money, he'll be able to pay me like $100 per month for the rest of his life. Factor in that he is a smoker, a drinker and has only one kidney (christ).

What do I do? Should I really settle for less and put up with crappy credit that is not my fault? That so goes against my instincts because I hate the idea of being punished for his crappy lifestyle.

Finally, is the break the kneecaps offer still good?

Originally posted by Gattigap
Drunk, please. That's not limited vocabulary, it's bad grammar. Leave me be, as I calmly await the taste of dtb's lash.

Timmy, police thyself. I love a public lashing.

[nononono]

Originally posted by NotFromHere
Then you could at least have had Atticus pitch in and help since he was just standing around and all.

Ya know, if they're content just standing around, I figure trying to draw them in at that point is just asking for trouble.

[robustpuppy]

Originally posted by notcasesensitive
So, I know you are all dying to help me out more with my Credit-Impaired Ex-Husband and resulting credit woes, so here it is:

Bank is saying that they made some efforts to contact me (calls to some number they had on file 6 years ago or whatever) and that the only way this comes off my credit is if I pay off entire amount. I may have a couple of months to do so, we haven't really gone into specifics because I did not agree on the phone that I would do so.

I'm 99% sure that they did not follow the letter of the state fair credit reporting law, which requires the mailing of notice w/i 30 days of putting something on my account. I need t owait to see the letter that they claim they mailed in July that I never received to confirm.

I could also settle the debt with them for less, I'm sure, but a write-off/settled claim will be on my credit for the next 7 years or whatever (I know I can send in a comment, but the effect on my overall score is what matters to this needs-to-rent-an-apartment-soon chick).

I can go after ex and get a judgment, and maybe even garnishment of wages at his new job that is supposed to solve all his credit woes. I'd guess, given the way he spends money as compared to the way he earns money, he'll be able to pay me like $100 per month for the rest of his life. Factor in that he is a smoker, a drinker and has only one kidney (christ).

What do I do? Should I really settle for less and put up with crappy credit that is not my fault? That so goes against my instincts because I hate the idea of being punished for his crappy lifestyle.

Finally, is the break the kneecaps offer still good?

Before deciding on anything, as I mentioned before, you should dispute EVERYTHING the bank says in writing. Even though you signed on as a guarantor, you have some basis to complain about the bank's method of seeking to recover the debt from you. You don't know that a very assertively worded letter citing the crap out of state and federal fair credit reporting requirements won't cause them to step back. If you can cite a technical violation, you are on pretty good ground to get some concessions.

There is nothing to stop you from demanding that they remove the negative report from your credit report by sending corrections to the credit bureaus, and if that works (it very well may), THEN you can try to negotiate a settlement for x cents on the dollar. They can't do you any more harm with respect to credit reporting than they already have, so an assertive but not abusive letter may do you more good than you anticipate.

Only pay it off to avoid the negative credit report after you're certain you can't get it removed, even if only temporarily. That will buy you time to get into your apartment -- although it seems unlikely this could hurt your chances. The landlord should be more interested in your debt-to-income than in one aberrant negative report relating to a deadbeat ex.

And remember: calling will not preserve your rights.

[greatwhitenorthchick]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
I can see discussing it and agreeing that he does not have to leave the head area -- that he doesn't have to see what she doesn't see. It should be enough to be there. I mean, we don't have spouses sitting in on surgeries and stuff, it doesn't seem like, and why do they have that drape over the woman's legs (so that she can't see it as it comes out) if not to shield her view? OK, maybe that's a TV thing and doesn't happen in real life. Maybe women do look on as the doctor widens the episiotomy (episiostomy?). It seems like a very personal decision, since it is pretty blood-ridden and many people are fearful of hospitals etc. Shit, my blood pressure would be way up just being in a hospital at all, and then to watch someone I loved being essentially torn open and in a ton of pain? And I'm completely helpless? And I kinda feel like it's my fault? I would want the least gory view possible. And if I thought I couldn't handle it, I would want the person's best friend or something there instead.

Isn't there a mom's and dad's board for this totally squicky stuff? I'm going to post about hockey, which is my equivalent of putting my fingers in my ears and going lalala while I read this post.

So, um, looks like Dany Heatly is going to Ottawa.
that's about it for today.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
One of my favorite FBisms just got its own Wikipedia entry. Fittingly, it contains two typos and a unwarranted provincial pride.

ETA: And one grammatical error.

ETAA: Anything important happen while I was away living life? Did Slave and Paigow finally unfuck each other?

ETCGA.

Not any more.

[pony_trekker]

Originally posted by greatwhitenorthchick
Isn't there a mom's and dad's board for this totally squicky stuff? I'm going to post about hockey, which is my equivalent of putting my fingers in my ears and going lalala while I read this post.

So, um, looks like Dany Heatly is going to Ottawa.
that's about it for today.

That's the mom and dad board not the lets-describe-in-blood-and-gore-guts board.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by dtb
How does this work, exactly? I mean, the pole got in there somehow, shouldn't it be extractable? Or is this akin to the dog-knot situation? (Is that the term? Am I using it correctly?)

It's sort of the polar (npi) opposite of the dog knot situation. The pole hasn;t changed dimensions; Weed has simply developed an incredibly powerful shpincter from clenching it so long.

However, I have to confess that I am not sure if I am more impressed or saddened that you possess such truly deviant knowledge. It's like getting a little flash in a meeting and finding that you aren't wearing panties. A little sexy, but not quite copy-editor sexy, IYKWIM.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Pretty Little Flower
Your angry guy schtick has moved beyond funny, past annoying, on through disturbing, and has settled at pitiable.

Pity works for some guys. Maybe pity is doing okay by Weed.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by notcasesensitive
So, I know you are all dying to help me out more with my Credit-Impaired Ex-Husband and resulting credit woes, so here it is:

Bank is saying that they made some efforts to contact me (calls to some number they had on file 6 years ago or whatever) and that the only way this comes off my credit is if I pay off entire amount. I may have a couple of months to do so, we haven't really gone into specifics because I did not agree on the phone that I would do so.

I'm 99% sure that they did not follow the letter of the state fair credit reporting law, which requires the mailing of notice w/i 30 days of putting something on my account. I need t owait to see the letter that they claim they mailed in July that I never received to confirm.

I could also settle the debt with them for less, I'm sure, but a write-off/settled claim will be on my credit for the next 7 years or whatever (I know I can send in a comment, but the effect on my overall score is what matters to this needs-to-rent-an-apartment-soon chick).

I can go after ex and get a judgment, and maybe even garnishment of wages at his new job that is supposed to solve all his credit woes. I'd guess, given the way he spends money as compared to the way he earns money, he'll be able to pay me like $100 per month for the rest of his life. Factor in that he is a smoker, a drinker and has only one kidney (christ).

What do I do? Should I really settle for less and put up with crappy credit that is not my fault? That so goes against my instincts because I hate the idea of being punished for his crappy lifestyle.

Finally, is the break the kneecaps offer still good?

Have a couple drinks tonight and read this, and pretend it's some friend asking for your advice. This will remove the emotional component, I think. My instinct is to do what rp said and, if nothing else works, to pay up so that your credit is intact and then garnish his wages or consider it a loss and move on or whatever.

I say this mainly because I did a stupid STUPID STUPID money thing last night for emotional reasons, something that in retrospect I would NEVER have told a friend to do, EVER EVER EVER, and the realtor did not stop me or even caution me and I am now drinking in the middle of the day after being chewed out (justifiably) (and in a friendly, loving way) by my sibling and my boss/work friend) for being so fucking stupid.

But it worked out OK. Or is supposed to. Who knows.



ETA and sorry gwinky. and nfh, I would have gone to the hospital with a friend whose husband wasn't up to it but she gave birth 10 weeks early while we were each on vacation away from the city in which we both lived, so it didn't work out.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
No. this kind of uniform:



nice hair weed! Flower couldn't even change out of his bike shorts?

Finally decided to come out? Is this inspired by the SFU finale?

[Not Bob]

Originally posted by greatwhitenorthchick
So, um, looks like Dany Heatly is going to Ottawa.
that's about it for today.

Teemu Selanne is going back to The Mighty Ducks. No word on whether Coach Gordon Bombay will give him much ice time.

[pony_trekker]

Originally posted by Not Bob
Teemu Selanne is going back to The Mighty Ducks. No word on whether Coach Gordon Bombay will give him much ice time.

Ranger rookie class is a nice bunch of hard-working kids, I heard too.

[notcasesensitive]

Originally posted by robustpuppy
Before deciding on anything, as I mentioned before, you should dispute EVERYTHING the bank says in writing. Even though you signed on as a guarantor, you have some basis to complain about the bank's method of seeking to recover the debt from you. You don't know that a very assertively worded letter citing the crap out of state and federal fair credit reporting requirements won't cause them to step back. If you can cite a technical violation, you are on pretty good ground to get some concessions.

There is nothing to stop you from demanding that they remove the negative report from your credit report by sending corrections to the credit bureaus, and if that works (it very well may), THEN you can try to negotiate a settlement for x cents on the dollar. They can't do you any more harm with respect to credit reporting than they already have, so an assertive but not abusive letter may do you more good than you anticipate.

Only pay it off to avoid the negative credit report after you're certain you can't get it removed, even if only temporarily. That will buy you time to get into your apartment -- although it seems unlikely this could hurt your chances. The landlord should be more interested in your debt-to-income than in one aberrant negative report relating to a deadbeat ex.

And remember: calling will not preserve your rights.

I hear what you are saying, and it is probably a good idea to send them a letter, but I was basically advised by my workout person here not to threaten any sort of litigation with them. I have mentioned FCRA generally on the phone, which led to the collection person saying something akin to "don't threaten me" and me saying that I was not threatening anything (I'm no longer dealing with her anyway, I've moved on to her superior). I've been biding my time a bit on the notice thing under state law because all I know is that it was reported to the credit agencies in July and they had 30 days from the date of reporting to comply. I don't want to tip them off before the period has run. Also I now need to see this purported July letter to see if they covered that requirement.

What would I do with the credit agencies? Dispute the report? I've never had to deal with this, so I'm not sure how that works.



ETA: It helps me not at all that Bank (and its affiliates) is a client of mine. So taking a tough stance with them may very well be frowned upon here.

[robustpuppy]

If you write your letter before you even get the letter from the Bank, then you can honestly say "I have never received written notice and your bank did not even succeeed in contacting me by phone until ___, 2005, at which time reporting had already occured."

I wouldn't construe this as threatening litigation. How would this affect your rights, anyway? What did your workout person say?

But I see your point about tipping off (I wrote the above before seeing your post).

Also, do have a drink as fringey suggests and don't let this stress you too much. It sucks that your ex is a deadbeat and lives like a loser, but your life is so much better now, and in the grand scheme you are exceedingly lucky that your worst-case scenario is you are out some amount of cash that you would hate to lose, but can afford to do so. You still get to be with Mr. Man and (presumably) the two of you have all four of your kidneys and no more than four nipples.