<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" media="screen" href="/~d/styles/rss2full.xsl"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/itemcontent.css"?><rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0" version="2.0">

<channel>
	<title>CreditFactors</title>
	
	<link>http://creditfactors.com</link>
	<description>FICO credit scores - settling debts - dealing with collectors ...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2012 23:44:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/Creditfactors" /><feedburner:info uri="creditfactors" /><atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" /><feedburner:emailServiceId>Creditfactors</feedburner:emailServiceId><feedburner:feedburnerHostname>http://feedburner.google.com</feedburner:feedburnerHostname><item>
		<title>Complaint to NM AG: debt buyer interest charges while account NOT owned</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Creditfactors/~3/sMPa-Uzmc7M/</link>
		<comments>http://creditfactors.com/2012/04/complaint-to-nm-ag-debt-buyer-interest-charges-while-account-not-owned/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Apr 2012 23:35:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Christine</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Debt buyers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Debt buyers fraudulent interest charges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[debt buyer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fraudulent interest charges]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://creditfactors.com/?p=880</guid>
		<description>Like so many debt buyers, Asset Acceptance ignored the dispute and it charges outrageous interest without providing any documentation allowing it to charge interest. My client’s complaint and my declaration submitted to the New Mexico attorney general. I have never seen Citi or Chase charge interest after an account was charged off.  Yet, debt buyers [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Creditfactors/~4/sMPa-Uzmc7M" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://creditfactors.com/2012/04/complaint-to-nm-ag-debt-buyer-interest-charges-while-account-not-owned/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://creditfactors.com/2012/04/complaint-to-nm-ag-debt-buyer-interest-charges-while-account-not-owned/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>The new Experian payment history legend, Verizon bizarre reporting and Experian incorrect verification</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Creditfactors/~3/2YVntpQrHcE/</link>
		<comments>http://creditfactors.com/2012/03/new-experian-payment-history-legend-verizon-bizarre-reporting-and-experian-incorrect-verification/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Mar 2012 02:56:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Christine</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Experian refusal to correct]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://creditfactors.com/?p=864</guid>
		<description>A client disputed this PAID Verizon account TWICE with Experian and it is STILL reported OBVIOUSLY incorrect as &amp;#8220;$653 written off&amp;#8221;: Experian reports: Status: Paid,Closed. $653 written off My client disputed twice that he PAID the account in full.  Verizon wrote $0 off, as evidenced by its reporting of the balances to Experian: Oct 2010: [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Creditfactors/~4/2YVntpQrHcE" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://creditfactors.com/2012/03/new-experian-payment-history-legend-verizon-bizarre-reporting-and-experian-incorrect-verification/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://creditfactors.com/2012/03/new-experian-payment-history-legend-verizon-bizarre-reporting-and-experian-incorrect-verification/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Capital One purchased HSBC (Orchard) – will they continue to offer BOTH cards?</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Creditfactors/~3/wVWbJNFKgcg/</link>
		<comments>http://creditfactors.com/2011/09/capital-one-purchased-hsbc-orchard-will-they-continue-to-offer-both-cards/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Sep 2011 20:09:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Christine</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Restablishing credit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Capital One]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Orchard]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[secured cards]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://creditfactors.com/?p=852</guid>
		<description>A  client who needed to re-establish credit just received his new Orchard and Capital One cards with $300 limits. [Added 9/2/11:  Another client who filed for Ch. 7 bankruptcy 6 months ago was approved for a $500 Orchard card, Purchases APR 14.90%, annual fee $19.   Capital One did NOT have anything for him and there's [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Creditfactors/~4/wVWbJNFKgcg" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://creditfactors.com/2011/09/capital-one-purchased-hsbc-orchard-will-they-continue-to-offer-both-cards/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://creditfactors.com/2011/09/capital-one-purchased-hsbc-orchard-will-they-continue-to-offer-both-cards/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>4.25% 30-year fixed rate FHA mortgage with several UNPAID collections</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Creditfactors/~3/89ySWWhzjd8/</link>
		<comments>http://creditfactors.com/2011/08/4-25-30-year-fixed-rate-fha-mortgage-with-several-unpaid-collections/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Aug 2011 16:06:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Christine</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Mortgage lending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[recent tax lien]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unpaid collection]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://creditfactors.com/?p=841</guid>
		<description>A client in WA closed last week with two reported UNPAID collections for about $15,000. Additionally, his most recently tax lien (now released) was just filed last December and he had several settled collections and judgments.  I&amp;#8217;m so happy we didn&amp;#8217;t have to settle with LVNV. Wife&amp;#8217;s FICO scores were around 800 with obviously perfect [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Creditfactors/~4/89ySWWhzjd8" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://creditfactors.com/2011/08/4-25-30-year-fixed-rate-fha-mortgage-with-several-unpaid-collections/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://creditfactors.com/2011/08/4-25-30-year-fixed-rate-fha-mortgage-with-several-unpaid-collections/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Part 1:  Trans Union FICO score 738 with two charge-offs</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Creditfactors/~3/YQIBMvUcoAY/</link>
		<comments>http://creditfactors.com/2011/03/part-1-trans-union-fico-score-738-with-two-charge-offs/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 Mar 2011 17:25:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Christine</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FICO scores]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[disputed tradelines]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://creditfactors.com/?p=825</guid>
		<description>The client&amp;#8217;s credit reports contained only 4 accounts: A positive student loan, two charge-offs with $0 balances and a Palisades collection. Due to the low number of accounts, it is easy to document how FICO scores rate accounts.  Tradelines reported by creditors as disputed are NOT rated as derogatory, but DO count for the so [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Creditfactors/~4/YQIBMvUcoAY" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://creditfactors.com/2011/03/part-1-trans-union-fico-score-738-with-two-charge-offs/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://creditfactors.com/2011/03/part-1-trans-union-fico-score-738-with-two-charge-offs/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Quicken Loans’ refusal to provide mortgage rate for 730 FICO score</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Creditfactors/~3/0zTzH5MIg4Y/</link>
		<comments>http://creditfactors.com/2010/09/quicken-loans-refusal-to-provide-mortgage-rate-for-730-fico-score/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Sep 2010 21:04:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Christine</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FICO scores]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[minimum 740 FICO score]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mortgage rate bait and switch]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://creditfactors.com/?p=753</guid>
		<description>A client is currently refinancing and they have PERFECT credit (as defined by rational people): No lates, no collections, no judgments or liens, nothing whatsoever that could be considered derogatory. However, they have a lot of debt (helping out their kids, times are tough) and unfortunately I didn&amp;#8217;t know that they needed to get a [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Creditfactors/~4/0zTzH5MIg4Y" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://creditfactors.com/2010/09/quicken-loans-refusal-to-provide-mortgage-rate-for-730-fico-score/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://creditfactors.com/2010/09/quicken-loans-refusal-to-provide-mortgage-rate-for-730-fico-score/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>NCO utility collection after move lowers FICO scores by over 100 points</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Creditfactors/~3/fECXoLeAtbc/</link>
		<comments>http://creditfactors.com/2010/07/nco-utility-collection-after-move-lowers-fico-scores-by-over-100-points/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 20:47:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Christine</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FICO scores]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NCO]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[utility collection]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://creditfactors.com/?p=710</guid>
		<description>My client moved last year, didn&amp;#8217;t get a bill and all of a sudden there&amp;#8217;s this NCO collection on his credit.  He panicked and immediately paid the utility company. THEN he found my websites and I just drafted the disputes for him. NCO reports only to Experian and Trans Union, so his Equifax report is [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Creditfactors/~4/fECXoLeAtbc" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://creditfactors.com/2010/07/nco-utility-collection-after-move-lowers-fico-scores-by-over-100-points/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://creditfactors.com/2010/07/nco-utility-collection-after-move-lowers-fico-scores-by-over-100-points/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Arthur Miller v. Cohen &amp; Slamowitz:  attorney’s failure to conduct meaningful review violates FDCPA</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Creditfactors/~3/LM2J-8eh85I/</link>
		<comments>http://creditfactors.com/2010/07/arthur-miller-v-cohen-slamowitz-attorneys-failure-to-conduct-meaningful-review-violates-fdcpa/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Jul 2010 22:15:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Christine</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Illegal collection practices]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FDCPA violation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Miller v Cohen & Slamowitz]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://creditfactors.com/?p=689</guid>
		<description>This case has been litigated since 2001.  Originally, notorious collection law firm Wolpoff &amp;#38; Abramson was one of the defendants as they had referred the account to Upton, Cohen &amp;#38; Slamowitz. Wolpoff then merged with Mann Bracken and they went bankrupt when Minnesota put an end to the National Arbitration Forum SCAM. Giant Debt Collector [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Creditfactors/~4/LM2J-8eh85I" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://creditfactors.com/2010/07/arthur-miller-v-cohen-slamowitz-attorneys-failure-to-conduct-meaningful-review-violates-fdcpa/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://creditfactors.com/2010/07/arthur-miller-v-cohen-slamowitz-attorneys-failure-to-conduct-meaningful-review-violates-fdcpa/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>You do NOT owe income tax after settling collections if you were INSOLVENT</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Creditfactors/~3/kW2E2jp6YGs/</link>
		<comments>http://creditfactors.com/2010/07/you-do-not-owe-income-tax-after-settling-collections-if-you-were-insolvent/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 00:29:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Christine</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Debt Settlement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[1099 for canceled debt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[settlement]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://creditfactors.com/?p=680</guid>
		<description>I&amp;#8217;m currently working with a client who is considering settling debts and concerned with having to pay income tax as his accounts are still owned by the original creditors.  So I did some research and I just reviewed the current rules. As always, I&amp;#8217;m NOT an attorney or CPA &amp;#8212; please read the IRS instructions [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Creditfactors/~4/kW2E2jp6YGs" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://creditfactors.com/2010/07/you-do-not-owe-income-tax-after-settling-collections-if-you-were-insolvent/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://creditfactors.com/2010/07/you-do-not-owe-income-tax-after-settling-collections-if-you-were-insolvent/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>FICO scores STILL create fictitious late payments on Equifax reports</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Creditfactors/~3/egqc-frgpvs/</link>
		<comments>http://creditfactors.com/2010/06/fico-scores-still-create-fictitious-late-payments-on-equifax-reports/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jun 2010 07:17:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Christine</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[myFICO Equifax FICTITIOUS late payments]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Equifax]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FICO software bug]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FICTITIOUS late payments]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[myFICO]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://creditfactors.com/?p=652</guid>
		<description>Over three years ago I documented that Equifax myFICO reports often contain entirely FICTITIOUS and extremely FICO score lowering RECENT late payments.  A FICO scoring software &amp;#8220;bug&amp;#8221; misinterpreted the charge-off reporting as late payment. This can NOT be fixed by Equifax as the Equifax direct report does not contain these late payments. I notified Fair [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Creditfactors/~4/egqc-frgpvs" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://creditfactors.com/2010/06/fico-scores-still-create-fictitious-late-payments-on-equifax-reports/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://creditfactors.com/2010/06/fico-scores-still-create-fictitious-late-payments-on-equifax-reports/</feedburner:origLink></item>
	</channel>
</rss>

