The Subterfuge Starts

After being bombarded by all of the horror stories of fellow consumers' dealings with the debt collection industry, it really didn't surprise me when I received my first letter in response to my complaints - not from Sherman, LVNV or Equifax, but from another company entirely.

The letter was from a Desimber Wattleton with Resurgent Capital Services and read as follows:

"This is a response to your correspondence dated October 14, 2005 regarding the above referenced account. Resurgent Capital Services is now servicing this account for its current owner, LVNV Funding, LLC. By signing a contract with Providian, you agreed to the terms and conditions allowing Providian to report your account history. At some point this account became delinquent and was subsequently charged off and sold to LVNV Funding, LLC (formerly Sherman Acquisition, LP). As current owner of the account, LVNV Funding, LLC has a right to report. This is not a duplicate tradeline or reporting error; this is how credit history is established, maintained, and scored."

"In most cases, creditors charge off accounts once they are 120 days or more past due/delinquent. The statement "120 days past due" is generally how a charged off account is defined by the credit bureaus. Due to the account being charged off, the bureaus still report it as 120 days past due even if it is paid. LVNV Funding, LLC does not report accounts as 120 days past due. This comment is added by the bureaus to further define the account; therefore, LVNV Funding, LLC cannot alter this statement on your credit report."

This is a perfect example of the classic finger-pointing scheme: LVNV points the finger at Equifax and tells me that the credit bureaus are responsible for the reporting. Now to really perfect the scheme, we need the other half - you guessed it - a letter from Equifax blaming LVNV, which we'll get to shortly. But first, let's get a little more in depth on exactly HOW and WHY an account appears on your report...

To be continued...