In Ocober 2004 Premium Asset Recovery Corp called me regarding a credit card debt incurred in 2000 - 2001. I'd just gotten dental work done and was medicated. At that time I was also inexperienced in these matters and very easily intimidated. This particularly vulturous person of course caught that scent and got extremely abusive and I agreed to make a payment via electronic check (post-dated) by phone using my check number. Several days later, clearheaded, I chcked my paperwork and realized the PAR caller had been referring to an old debt and I'd confused it with another debt (that I subsequently did pay down)
Not wanting to deal with them on the phone again, I called my bank and requested a stop payment on the check. When the check ($450.00 approx) cleared anyway I called the bank and they said because there was a different number on the check than the one specified in my stop pay request there was nothing they could do! I logged into my bank account online, pulled up the actual check image and printed it out - PAR had put another number on it. I went to my bank branch with all the documentation they took responsibility and pulled the money back, refunded all the associated NSF fees.
I wrote several registered letters to PAR, tellling them I didn't think the debt was even valid anymore and telling them never to call me or try taking money (fraudulently?) again. For a few weeks I heard nothing, then they started calling again, leaving intimidating messages. I ignored them. And sending letters which I also ignored. Sometime during this time they changed to Asset Acceptance and in March of this year they sued me
I've been very ill, mentally and physically and truthfully I was too afraid to go to court and face such aggression. And I didn't think they could "prove" something that isn't true!
They re-aged my debt by saying that the payment I took back was a partial payment to Providian (original creditor) That's what it says in summons. I have documentation to support all of this including original letter from PAR informing me they'd be putting the agreed-upon check number through and then the image of the actual piece of paper they did submit. Now I have a default judgement entered against me as of May 15How could they have done this without submitting false documents? Help!
0 comments