Complaint Review: Castle Credit Corporation F/k/a Advance Studies, Inc. - Chicago Illinois
Ripoff Report on CBS 19
Ripoff Report on CBS 19 - Global Marketing Alliance
Ripoff Report on ABC 15 - Smart Shopper
Ripoff Report - Girls Gone Wild
Ripoff Report on Fox 11 - Car Repair
- Author Confirmed
- Castle Credit Corporation F/k/a Advance Studies, Inc. 8420 W. Bryn Mawr #300 Chicago, Illinois U.S.A.
- Phone: 773-380-7310
- Web:
- Category: Credit Services
Castle Credit Corporation F/k/a Advance Studies Barry Bruno's business has been around awhile... steps to protect yourself against debt collectors it is a ripoff! Chicago Illinois
*Author of original report: Source Attribution
*Author of original report: Source Attribution
*Author of original report: Source Attribution
*Author of original report: Terms of Settlement / Notice...
*Author of original report: ANNOUNCEMENT OF SETTLEMENT WITH NATIONAL ACCEPTANCE
*Author of original report: SETTLEMENT
*Author of original report: SETTLEMENT
*Author of original report: SETTLEMENT
*Author of original report: SETTLEMENT
*Author of original report: NEW INFORMATION!
*Author of original report: OK...What to do is another matter, though!
*Consumer Suggestion: There's NO NEED for ANY of that! This "debt" is uncollectable!!
*Author of original report: How We Dealt with Castle Credit a/k/a Advance Studies, Inc.
Show customers why they should trust your business over your competitors...
listed on other sites?
Those sites steal
Ripoff Report's
content.
We can get those
removed for you!
Find out more here.
Ripoff Report
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..
Folks,
Years ago (1989-1992), while I was on active duty with the U.S. Army at Ft. Hood, TX, I was approached by a firm known as MARTIN & ASSOCIATES, which employed door-to-door salespeople who use high-pressure sales tactics to get your business. They promise the moon, and deliver dust (mostly paper promises). They are agents for CASTLE CREDIT CORPORATION - formerly known as ADVANCE STUDIES, INC., a firm run by one Barry Bruno in Chicago, IL.
Suffice it to say, my then-wife and I had just returned from the 1st Persian Gulf War, had next to nothing after it was destroyed in storage, and got suckered by these folks. Once the goods arrived, we realized there was a problem and cancelled our order, refused all further deliveries, and wrote letters complaining of the poor quality of the goods we did get...all to no avail. Finally, we sent ADVANCE STUDIES (as it was then called) a check in accord and satisfaction of the alleged debt.
Then, ADVANCE STUDIES complained to our chain of command that we were dishonorably failing to pay our debts. Even our chain of command disagreed with them! June 1992 was the last time ADVANCE STUDIES got a penny from us. But, the saga isn't over yet! The update is posted below...
Best wishes,
James U.S. Army Veteran
-------------------------------------------
UPDATE...FOURTEEN YEARS LATER...
-------------------------------------------
To whom it may concern:
Because NATIONAL ACCEPTANCE a/k/a CONTINENTAL CREDIT placed an improper entry on my credit bureau report with Experian, and further because this firm refused to verify an alleged debt while still attempting to collect it, I sued them. I won a $2,036.00 Judgment in the Circuit Court of Clay County, Missouri (Civil Case #CV106-0024SC, styled: 'James W, Plaintiff -vs.- National Acceptance, Defendant, and Terry W, Defendant.'
BACKGROUND:
On November 29, 2005; December 5, 2005; and December 15, 2005, a firm by the name of NATIONAL ACCEPTANCE (1725 ASHLEY CR., BOWLING GREEN, KY 42104) wrote me a letter attempting to collect a debt of $1471.22 allegedly owed to CASTLE CREDIT CORPORATION (formerly: ADVANCE STUDIES, INC. of Chicago, IL).
In 1991, while I was on active duty in the Army, two salesmen operating a firm known as MARTIN & ASSOCIATES approached my then-wife and I with a door-to-door salespitch. We got suckered and stuck with a bill; however, because the products were not as good as they claimed, we disputed the debt in 1992, and in June 1992 sent Advance Studies, Inc. (now Castle Credit) a $12.04 check in accord and satisfaction (settlement) of the debt.
That was the last time we paid Advance Studies a dime. Because the contract was signed with a citizen of Missouri (me), and I was in the military at that time, the contract was governed under the laws of Missouri. The statute of limitations in Missouri on the so-called debt is ten (10) years, so it's clear that this debt is beyond collectible. Nonetheless, be aware that Kentucky has a fifteen (15) year statute of limitations, and that's why this firm bought these accounts - on the offhand chance they sue you, unless you tell the judge you reside in a different state, he or she will assume the contract was signed in Kentucky and is governed under their laws. DO NOT ALLOW YOURSELF TO BE SUED IN KENTUCKY UNLESS YOU LIVE THERE! The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act requires you to be sued in the state of your residence!
Through Experian, I learned that this firm also goes by the names CONTINENTAL CREDIT of Colorado Springs, Colorado (they DO NOT have an office there, just a postal machine that stamps their letters as coming from there), AMERICAN CREDIT, and AMERICAN ACCEPTANCE. This firm also uses PO Box addresses in Bowling Green, Kentucky. According to the Warren County, KY Clerk, there is no assumed name registration on record for any of these firms, nor will you find this firm registered with the Secretary of State of Kentucky - so, for starters, this firm is operating illegally.
The letters this firm uses says the Collection Manager is TERRY WINTERS. Because there really is a T Winters in Bowling Green, KY, I want to emphatically state that this is NOT the same person. The TERRY WINTERS name used by National Acceptance is an unregistered assumed name used to avoid litigation. I feel absolutely terrible that NATIONAL ACCEPTANCE would use an unlawful assumed name that closely resembles the name of a person actually living in their city, poor corporate citizenship!
I wrote NATIONAL ACCEPTANCE back on December 7, 2005, and explained that because of the accord and satisfaction check and the statute of limitations, I did not owe them a cent. I demanded verification of the debt, and they refused - but, they still tried to collect the debt in a December 15, 2005 letter. That's a no-no! On December 28, 2005, I mailed a Petition for Damages to my local courthouse seeking damages against NATIONAL ACCEPTANCE and TERRY WINTERS in the amount of $2000 plus costs.
On January 17, 2006, through its agent STEPHANIE SILVANO, I served NATIONAL ACCEPTANCE and TERRY WINTERS. Once served, if NATIONAL ACCEPTANCE thought I owed money, they had ten days to file a compulsory counterclaim against me. If a compulsory counterclaim isn't filed, it is waived. On January 28, 2006, any compulsory counterclaim by NATIONAL ACCEPTANCE for the supposed debt owed to Castle Credit (Advance Studies) had to be submitted to the Court for disposition, but they did not file their compulsory counterclaim, so that issue is now resolved: they waived it.
On February 3, 2006, the Court heard my evidence and gave me a Judgment against NATIONAL ACCEPTANCE and TERRY WINTERS for $1000 on their violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, another $1000 for their violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, and $36 for court costs to sue and serve them. Because an equitable lien of judgment exists, I filed a UCC-1 with the Secretary of State of Kentucky, perfecting a judgment lien against ALL the business and personal property of NATIONAL ACCEPTANCE (by whatever name it is going by) and TERRY WINTERS (or those employees and agents of National Acceptance, et al., who use that moniker).
----------
WORDS OF CAUTION! IF YOU AREN'T FORMALLY TRAINED IN LAW, HAVE A LICENSED ATTORNEY HELP YOU WITH STEPS [2] AND [3] BELOW.
[1] Just because a collection agency claims you owe a debt, doesn't make it so. Require written verification of a debt EVERY TIME! You do this by ALWAYS disputing the validity of a debt (they often are wrong about interest owed) in writing within 30 days after their first dunning letter.
[2] A debt collector cannot collect a debt that is outside the statutes of limitations unless you acknowledge the debt (saying you owe it, or paying them something on it.) As long as you don't acknowledge a debt in writing or pay something on it, they really can't touch you (even though they are VERY ANNOYING). Some states' statutes of limitations are as short as three (3) years. DO NOT ASSUME YOU OWE A DEBT! Check your statute of limitations! If the debt is from a credit card company, the statute of limitations is often shorter than a debt based on a contract, like the alleged debt I mentioned above. If your last payment was longer ago than the statute of limitations, you probably DO NOT owe the debt.
[3] Make the debt collector verify the debt. If they don't, and EVEN IF YOU DO OWE the debt, that's a violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, and gives you a sweet $1000 statutory damages counterclaim if they should later sue you. Alternatively, you can sue them for the statutory damages and force them to file a counterclaim against you for the alleged debt they think you owe. If they don't file the counterclaim (because it arises out of the same transaction, it is considered a compulsory counterclaim), they waive the claim against you.
--------------
FINAL THOUGHTS ABOUT THESE CON-ARTISTS.
[1] National Acceptance, Continental Credit, American Acceptance, and American Credit are NOT properly registered with the County Clerk or Secretary of State. That makes the owner(s) of this firm criminals in the eyes of the law for Kentucky! Despite this, I've tried to contact the authorities in Kentucky and Warren County, and they don't seem too interested: just something to think about!
[2] National Acceptance was sued in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, and lost to the tune of $3250. American Acceptance was sued in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri and lost to the tune of $6674.50. With my $2036.00 judgment, that means the Judgment Creditors could file a Chapter 7 Involuntary Bankruptcy against this firm and its owners/agents.
[3] The person who signed for the Summons of the Circuit Court of Clay County, Missouri, is Ms. Stephanie Silvano. I don't know if she's the owner or not (probably not), but she will be seeing a Judge in Kentucky for passing a bad check to the local pizza establishment on March 6, 2006. So far as I can tell, there's nothing good going on with National Acceptance (by whatever name it chooses to call itself).
[4] Pay these folks NOTHING! Do NOT agree to pay these folks! Make them prove EVERYTHING in WRITING!!
[5] Even if you owe money, NATIONAL ACCEPTANCE is not legally organized, and may not have standing to sue in ANY jurisdiction. Seek legal assistance if you think you DO owe the debt, because NATIONAL ACCEPTANCE must first be a legal business entity to sue you in most states. Right now, they are NOT.
[6] Based on the Bankruptcy Case filings by NATIONAL ACCEPTANCE's employees, NATIONAL ACCEPTANCE is NOT withholding social security, FICA, Medicare, and/or State or Federal Income Taxes for its personnel. The IRS and State of Kentucky may have a prior claim against NATIONAL ACCEPTANCE even if you sue and win.
FOR ALL THESE REASONS AND SO MUCH MORE: the firm NATIONAL ACCEPTANCE, by whatever name it uses this week, is a RIPOFF!
One last thing: According to Experian, NATIONAL ACCEPTANCE is owned by Matt & Karen Bodie (although the last name is Brodie according to the process server in the Western District of Missouri case). The Experian file number is H20573193.
Best wishes,
James U.S. Army Veteran
Kansas City, Missouri
U.S.A.
CLICK here to see why Rip-off Report, as a matter of policy, deleted either a phone number, link or e-mail address from this Report.
This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 02/20/2006 06:55 AM and is a permanent record located here: https://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/castle-credit-corporation-fka-advance-studies-inc/chicago-illinois-60631/castle-credit-corporation-fka-advance-studies-barry-brunos-business-has-been-around-awh-177118. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year. Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report. READ: Foreign websites steal our content
If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:
#13 Author of original report
Source Attribution
AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Monday, April 03, 2006
Follow-up to Settlement Notices...
In my foregoing Notices, I quoted Mr. Mark Wortman, Attorney at Law, from an e-mail. To be fair, and to avoid future litigation over intellectual property (namely, who owned the rights to the words used on the internet), I cited Mr. Wortman and his e-mail to be clear to avoid confusion as to whose thoughts, words, and ideas were being used.
I also wish to publicly thank Mr. Wortman for his consistent promptness in responding to my e-mail correspondence, for his politeness in dealing with me as his opponent, and for his negotiating skills in reaching this settlement. Even though Mr. Wortman and I are on opposite sides of this particular case, I'd have no problem retaining him in my own future legal affairs, and I want to be clear that he's a skilled and effective attorney-a credit to his profession.
Again, my quote of Mr. Wortman was necessary to avoid a charge of plagiarism, no more and no less - I am participating in a settlement of my own free will (he's not holding a gun to my head).
Best wishes,
#12 Author of original report
Source Attribution
AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Monday, April 03, 2006
Follow-up to Settlement Notices...
In my foregoing Notices, I quoted Mr. Mark Wortman, Attorney at Law, from an e-mail. To be fair, and to avoid future litigation over intellectual property (namely, who owned the rights to the words used on the internet), I cited Mr. Wortman and his e-mail to be clear to avoid confusion as to whose thoughts, words, and ideas were being used.
I also wish to publicly thank Mr. Wortman for his consistent promptness in responding to my e-mail correspondence, for his politeness in dealing with me as his opponent, and for his negotiating skills in reaching this settlement. Even though Mr. Wortman and I are on opposite sides of this particular case, I'd have no problem retaining him in my own future legal affairs, and I want to be clear that he's a skilled and effective attorney-a credit to his profession.
Again, my quote of Mr. Wortman was necessary to avoid a charge of plagiarism, no more and no less - I am participating in a settlement of my own free will (he's not holding a gun to my head).
Best wishes,
#11 Author of original report
Source Attribution
AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Monday, April 03, 2006
Follow-up to Settlement Notices...
In my foregoing Notices, I quoted Mr. Mark Wortman, Attorney at Law, from an e-mail. To be fair, and to avoid future litigation over intellectual property (namely, who owned the rights to the words used on the internet), I cited Mr. Wortman and his e-mail to be clear to avoid confusion as to whose thoughts, words, and ideas were being used.
I also wish to publicly thank Mr. Wortman for his consistent promptness in responding to my e-mail correspondence, for his politeness in dealing with me as his opponent, and for his negotiating skills in reaching this settlement. Even though Mr. Wortman and I are on opposite sides of this particular case, I'd have no problem retaining him in my own future legal affairs, and I want to be clear that he's a skilled and effective attorney-a credit to his profession.
Again, my quote of Mr. Wortman was necessary to avoid a charge of plagiarism, no more and no less - I am participating in a settlement of my own free will (he's not holding a gun to my head).
Best wishes,
#10 Author of original report
Terms of Settlement / Notice...
AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Wednesday, March 29, 2006
THE EXACT TERMS OF THE SETTLEMENT WERE AS FOLLOWS...
Dear Mr. Whedbee:
I am in receipt of your letter to ripoffreport.com, and I have discussed this matter with my client. Since you are having difficulty getting them to remove the information from the website, my client is reluctant to settle with you. However, I discussed with them the expense and time that they will incur by litigating this case, and they are willing to make you another offer.
Basically, if you are willing to post content on ripoffreport.com indicating that the information that you posted is inaccurate, you have no evidence to support the claims that you made, that you were mistaken as to the facts, and that National Acceptance has treated you fairly and reasonably with respect to your dispute and has worked with you to resolve it, and thus you have decided to dismiss the case, then they will still be willing to pay you a settlement of $500 upon dismissal of the case.
Please let me know if this offer is acceptable to you.
Mark A.Wortman
Mark A. Wortman, Attorney At Law, LC
============================
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THESE TERMS, IT IS REQUIRED THAT I SAY THE FOLLOWING...
That the information posted above is inaccurate;
That I lack evidence to support the foregoing;
That I have made a mistake as to the allegations;
That National Acceptance has resolved this matter in a manner which, as settled, is fair and reasonable; and,
That I will dismiss ONLY as to National Acceptance my litigation.
J.Whedbee
#9 Author of original report
ANNOUNCEMENT OF SETTLEMENT WITH NATIONAL ACCEPTANCE
AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Saturday, March 25, 2006
THIS IS TO NOTIFY ALL PERSONS, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE, THAT THE ISSUES RAISED IN THIS COMPLAINT OR ANY RELATED COMPLAINT ARE SUBJECT TO PENDING SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS, AND AT THIS TIME, THE UNDERSIGNED IS SATISFIED THAT THE PROBLEMS COMPLAINED OF WILL BE RESOLVED TO HIS SATISFACTION. ACCORDINGLY, I HAVE DIRECTED RIPOFFREPORT.COM TO REMOVE ANY AND ALL REPORTS CONCERNING MATTHEW BODDEY, KAREN KELLY BODDEY, NATIONAL ACCEPTANCE, AMERICAN ACCEPTANCE, AMERICAN CREDIT, AND CONTINENTAL CREDIT. AT THIS TIME, I DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL LIABILITY FOR THE POSTINGS ON THIS WEBSITE WHICH REMAIN FOLLOWING THIS WRITTEN RETRACTION OF THE COMPLAINTS...
BEST WISHES, JAMES E. WHEDBEE OF KANSAS CITY, MO
#8 Author of original report
SETTLEMENT
AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Friday, March 24, 2006
THIS IS TO NOTIFY ALL PERSONS, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE, THAT THE ISSUES RAISED IN THIS COMPLAINT OR ANY RELATED COMPLAINT ARE SUBJECT TO PENDING SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS, AND AT THIS TIME, THE UNDERSIGNED IS SATISFIED THAT THE PROBLEMS COMPLAINED OF WILL BE RESOLVED TO HIS SATISFACTION. ACCORDINGLY, I HAVE DIRECTED RIPOFFREPORT.COM TO REMOVE ANY AND ALL REPORTS CONCERNING MATTHEW BODDEY, KAREN KELLY BODDEY, NATIONAL ACCEPTANCE, AMERICAN ACCEPTANCE, AMERICAN CREDIT, AND CONTINENTAL CREDIT. AT THIS TIME, I DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL LIABILITY FOR THE POSTINGS ON THIS WEBSITE WHICH REMAIN FOLLOWING THIS WRITTEN RETRACTION OF THE COMPLAINTS...
BEST WISHES, JAMES E. WHEDBEE OF KANSAS CITY, MO
#7 Author of original report
SETTLEMENT
AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Friday, March 24, 2006
THIS IS TO NOTIFY ALL PERSONS, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE, THAT THE ISSUES RAISED IN THIS COMPLAINT OR ANY RELATED COMPLAINT ARE SUBJECT TO PENDING SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS, AND AT THIS TIME, THE UNDERSIGNED IS SATISFIED THAT THE PROBLEMS COMPLAINED OF WILL BE RESOLVED TO HIS SATISFACTION. ACCORDINGLY, I HAVE DIRECTED RIPOFFREPORT.COM TO REMOVE ANY AND ALL REPORTS CONCERNING MATTHEW BODDEY, KAREN KELLY BODDEY, NATIONAL ACCEPTANCE, AMERICAN ACCEPTANCE, AMERICAN CREDIT, AND CONTINENTAL CREDIT. AT THIS TIME, I DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL LIABILITY FOR THE POSTINGS ON THIS WEBSITE WHICH REMAIN FOLLOWING THIS WRITTEN RETRACTION OF THE COMPLAINTS...
BEST WISHES, JAMES E. WHEDBEE OF KANSAS CITY, MO
#6 Author of original report
SETTLEMENT
AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Friday, March 24, 2006
THIS IS TO NOTIFY ALL PERSONS, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE, THAT THE ISSUES RAISED IN THIS COMPLAINT OR ANY RELATED COMPLAINT ARE SUBJECT TO PENDING SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS, AND AT THIS TIME, THE UNDERSIGNED IS SATISFIED THAT THE PROBLEMS COMPLAINED OF WILL BE RESOLVED TO HIS SATISFACTION. ACCORDINGLY, I HAVE DIRECTED RIPOFFREPORT.COM TO REMOVE ANY AND ALL REPORTS CONCERNING MATTHEW BODDEY, KAREN KELLY BODDEY, NATIONAL ACCEPTANCE, AMERICAN ACCEPTANCE, AMERICAN CREDIT, AND CONTINENTAL CREDIT. AT THIS TIME, I DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL LIABILITY FOR THE POSTINGS ON THIS WEBSITE WHICH REMAIN FOLLOWING THIS WRITTEN RETRACTION OF THE COMPLAINTS...
BEST WISHES, JAMES E. WHEDBEE OF KANSAS CITY, MO
#5 Author of original report
SETTLEMENT
AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Friday, March 24, 2006
THIS IS TO NOTIFY ALL PERSONS, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE, THAT THE ISSUES RAISED IN THIS COMPLAINT OR ANY RELATED COMPLAINT ARE SUBJECT TO PENDING SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS, AND AT THIS TIME, THE UNDERSIGNED IS SATISFIED THAT THE PROBLEMS COMPLAINED OF WILL BE RESOLVED TO HIS SATISFACTION. ACCORDINGLY, I HAVE DIRECTED RIPOFFREPORT.COM TO REMOVE ANY AND ALL REPORTS CONCERNING MATTHEW BODDEY, KAREN KELLY BODDEY, NATIONAL ACCEPTANCE, AMERICAN ACCEPTANCE, AMERICAN CREDIT, AND CONTINENTAL CREDIT. AT THIS TIME, I DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL LIABILITY FOR THE POSTINGS ON THIS WEBSITE WHICH REMAIN FOLLOWING THIS WRITTEN RETRACTION OF THE COMPLAINTS...
BEST WISHES, JAMES E. WHEDBEE OF KANSAS CITY, MO
#4 Author of original report
NEW INFORMATION!
AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Friday, February 24, 2006
National Acceptance a.k.a. Continental Credit
1725 Ashley Circle - Suite #208
Bowling Green, Kentucky 42104
IS REGISTERED TO THE FOLLOWING PEOPLE:
Matthew Boddey, DOB 06-27-1967
Karen Kelly Boddey, DOB 12-18-1959
4603 Desert Varnish Drive
Colorado Springs, CO 80922-2385.
According to the State of Texas, Mr. Boddey has two misdemeanor convictions. According to the State of Florida, Mrs. Boddey has one misdemeanor conviction. The State of Colorado requires debt collectors to be licensed; these folks are not.
:)
#3 Author of original report
OK...What to do is another matter, though!
AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Tuesday, February 21, 2006
I agree that the statute of limitations did run (I think I did mention that). I also agree that you shouldn't send a check once the statute of limitations ran (in fact, if you check the dates above, you'll notice I sent the accord and satisfaction check in June 1992, and the low lifes trying to collect surfaced in 2005). Filing an FTC complaint is wonderful, but tantamount to doing nothing at all (FTC rarely intervenes directly). Rather than waiting for some overpaid and underworked GS-14 to notice my situation, I chose to sue the low lifes you mentioned for violating my rights under the FCRA and FDCPA and I won. Then, I filed a UCC-1 to collateralize the judgment. My next step will either be to have the Sheriff levy their property or I might join with two others who have judgments against the "low life" and put 'em out of business by filing an INvoluntary Chapter 7 Liquidation Bankruptcy on 'em. But, right now, that's speculation. I got my judgment, and for now, I'm happy! Thanks for the input!
Best wishes,
#2 Consumer Suggestion
There's NO NEED for ANY of that! This "debt" is uncollectable!!
AUTHOR: Steve - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Tuesday, February 21, 2006
This "debt" is far past the statute of limitations for collections.
Any check you would send on it would legally restart the statute of limitations and make the debt collectable.
File an FTC complaint online at FTC.gov and also go to BudHibbs.com to learn about these types of lowlifes and your rights under the FDCPA and the FCRA.
Stop all phone calls and only communicate via certified mail, return reciept requested and always put the certified# on the letter itself.
Seek out assets and file liens to recover your judgement.
#1 Author of original report
How We Dealt with Castle Credit a/k/a Advance Studies, Inc.
AUTHOR: James - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Monday, February 20, 2006
Just to let you know...
There is a way which legally can deal with these kinds of con artists. I'd caution you, it might get you off the hook legally, but your credit bureau reports will be screwed up for a few years (basically, because that's the only way these guys have to get back at you for discharging the debt).
[1] You could file bankruptcy - if you're in the military, probably not a great idea if you need a security clearance.
[2] You could use a check to discharge the debt. This is a legal tactic insurance companies use to avoid getting sued by us, but if you've read your U.S. Constitution, the 14th Amendment gives us all equal protection under the law, so what works for big business can be used by us. Here's the thing...I'm going to tell you how I did this - I still suggest making a phone call to JAG or your private legal counsel to get their advice.
For starters, to use a check to discharge an obligation, there must be a genuine issue of dispute. So, write Castle Credit a letter and mail it certified return-receipt requested explaining your full dispute to them. In the letter, state the following: "Unless you provide a lawful dispute to all of what's in this letter, I will assume you completely agree with it." Wait ten (10) days for them to respond - they either won't or the letter won't fully refute your argument. Once a genuine disagreement exists, you can do what the insurance companies do to eliminate an obligation. Time to break out your checkbook.
Let me preface this by saying you'll need a typewriter to do this neatly (if it's neat, they can't say they couldn't read it). Write a personal check payable to "CASTLE CREDIT - Acct. #" and put your account number right after the name "CASTLE CREDIT - Acct. #." Make it out in the amount of your monthly payment, plus one dollar - the additional one dollar is the additional inducement offered by the check to discharge the debt. In the "memo" block of the check, write "Account is Disputed." On the back of the check, where CASTLE CREDIT should endorse the check, type: "CASTLE CREDIT, in accepting this payment forever releases and acquits ______________________________ from any and all claims, known or unknown, because of the account listed on the face of this check, and waives any objection to a defense of accord and satisfaction." In the blank, you write your name and that of your spouse (if your spouse is jointly indebted). They may or may not cash the check. Most often, they do. If they cash that check, you must wait 90 days and do NOT pay them another penny during that 90 day window. They have those 90 days to refund you the amount of the check.
On day 91, you write Castle Credit a letter stating that the account is closed and discharged by reason of accord and satisfaction of a disputed debt. Send that letter certified return-receipt requested. Make sure you keep a copy of the letters, return-receipts, and the cashed check to give your chain of command and that way, when Castle Credit attempts to cite you for dishonorably failing to pay your debts, you don't get popped for UCMJ action.
Now, like my original message states, this is what I did back in 1992. My chain of command was kept aware of the situation the whole time. They had a copy of the accord and satisfaction check. I also had advice from my JAG officer when I did all this. It worked. Now, 14 years later, I have a Court Judgment against the people who bought the account from Castle Credit. So, just be aware it'll be a rough ride for your credit report for a few years, and Castle Credit's folks are going to annoy the you-know-what out of you for a few months, but basically, there's nothing they can do once they've kept payment on that check for more than 90 days.
Hope this helps!
Best wishes,
James U.S. Army Veteran
Kansas City, MO
CLICK here to see why Rip-off Report, as a matter of policy, deleted either a phone number, link or e-mail address from this Report.
Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.
