When you say you notified the government on this issue, I assume you mean Consumer Affairs. But they will do little to help you on this.

Bank, collection agencies, lawyers and credit bureaus hang out, party, play poker and do favours for one another, including referring the staff they each hire. It's all one big happy family.

If you complain on any level, including to the Provincial Registrar, Brian Pitkin, you'll only be stonewalled.

I didn't realize we were talking about a paltry $65. Maybe it came with the WF portfolio. No one is going to sue you over $65, whether you owe it or not. I'm pretty sure if you call them at the number I listed, they'll close the account for such a small amount.

I should have mentioned the Trans Union "reported" date in their "Collections" section, corresponds to the Equifax "date of last activity" in their "Public Records" section, which, as previously stated, contains debts acquired by debt buyers. Unfortunately, Equifax also uses the identical term for the same debt listed under their "Trade Lines" section which lists the accounts with the original lenders. Thus for one debt, there can be more than one "date of last activity."

All of this is confusing to say the least and Equifax likes it that way. The more transparent their reporting is the more questions consumers will raise. If you call Equifax up @ 1-866 828-5961 and try to explain the discrepancy you'll get the 3 monkey's treatment. But the zombies are just following orders.

If you call Aktiv Kapital, they will tell you they can't change the "reported date" on the TransUnion file nor the "date of last activity" on the Equifax file because that's the way bureau files are formatted and they aren't going to change them for you. You may have to wait until Feb., 2014 approaches and then get the 6 year period ironed out through the AK ombudsman or bug them until they do.

OK, the last payment on this debt was February 2008. I was under the understanding that the debt was paid in full, I have a letter to that effect. According to Aktiv Kapital I still owe $65.43. I just spoke with a source in the field of debt purchasing and this is what Aktiv does. When they purchase the debt they use the date of purchase of the debt not last payment to original creditor. This is in violation of the Collections Act. Transunion and Equifax were notified by the Government on this issue and I have notified them as well. Apparently, they know what they doing is wrong and the government is also investigating them as well.

Also, in the province of Ontario, The collections act was revised in 2004 so the rules have changed. the courts in Ontario don't like making judgements on debt less than $250.

Yes, the SOL in Ontario is 2 years for this kind of debt. Not too sure what you mean. If you've already paid it off, why would that be relevant? The limitation period to start legal action has nothing to do with how long a creditor can try to collect on a debt or even sell it. Note that there are collection period limitations in some other provinces, though not in Ontario.

This sort of problem is frequent with debt buyers like ARO and Aktiv Kapital. Contact their ombuds(wo)man in London, Ont. at 1866 764-7688 ext. 2536 on Monday and tell her the problem. Unlike her predecessor, Lorie Roberts, you may have to bug her more than once to fix the reporting error with the 2 bureaus. Don't try to make the correction yourself as bureau personnel will ignore any documentation you send them. The dispute forms accompanying the hard copies of their credit reports are strictly for show and legal compliance. It costs money to properly investigate disputes and they don't have time for such nuisances. It produces no profit and annoys their high paying members. They're not working for you; they're working for them.

Any creditor, whether or original or subsequent is not obliged too report it to the bureaus but they almost always will. Certainly Aktiv Kapital does.

On the Trans Union credit report, the debt purchase will be found under the "Collections" section, just after the "Public Records" section which contains info on judgments and bankruptcies.

In the "collections" section you will notice a 6 digit account ID number which identifies the purchase details with the previous creditor. That's important because both bureau policies is to retain negative information on a debt from the date of original default for 6 years, no matter how many companies buy the debt or if it gets settled in the future.

As stated before, it's not the same as the Consumer Reporting Act's 7 years (since the last payment was made) limit for negative information. Do the credit bureau member companies have a big heart? Hardly. They don't want to provide a disincentive for consumers to make payments toward clearing up bad debts. That would be the case if every time a payment was made on a delinquent account, the reporting period started all over again. Heck, no one would pay anything off.

Difficulties arise because in the "Collections" section, 2 different dates are used. One is the "reported" date, and the other is the "reviewed" date. It is the "reported" date which causes problems. It refers to when the debt buyer purchased the account, which obviously might be years after date of first default with the first creditor. In your case, if Aktive Kapital purchased the account from Wells Fargo, in Oct of 2010, the discrepancy is 2 years and 8 months.

If you don't do anything, it will automatically stay on the "Collections" of your reports for 6 years from Oct. 2010. The bureaus are supposed to identify form the 6 digit Account ID reference number what the first date of default with the original creditor was but they seldom do. They don't want to annoy their high paying members. In reality though the discrepancy is readily apparnet to them since the delinquent account with original creditor will be listed under their "Trade[lines]" section at the beginning of the report. The "Trade" section contains account info that existed with the original creditors.

A single bad debt can generate several entries under various sections of reports. It can appear under the Trade section, then under the Collections section if it is sold; and then almost an endless number of times under both the hard and soft inquiries sections because the debt might be rotated to as many as six 3rd party collections before it is sold. And finally, if the consumer is sued, it'll appear for an additional 6 or 7 years from the date of judgment with Equifax, and Trans Union respectively. Whew! Talk about overkill!

The Equifax report format is not identical to TransUnion's in that they call the Collections section of their report "Public Records and Other Information" and lump bankruptcies in with it. But note that the 6 digit account identifier that the debt purchaser uses is the same for both bureaus.

When AktivKapital buys Bad Debt from Wells Fargo, are they required to report it to the Credit Reporting Agencies as the New Owner of the debt? If so, the debt is from February 2008 (the last payment on the account). Isn't the SOL for Ontario 2 years. Why did they start the SOL from October 2010? Help is needed. Outstanding bill was paid and Aktiv will not forward proof of outstanding debt.

I think the point that I was making is this (all you lawyers get out your notepads). From a legal standpoint let’s say someone takes out an unsecured loan from a lending institution, and then subsequently defaults on that loan. In the loan agreement the lending institution has wording to the effect that should the borrower default the account would be sent to collections. This agreement constitutes a contract between the lending institution and the borrower. But now the point is reached were the debt is sold….were now is the contract that involves the borrower…sure there might be a contract between the first CA and the second CA….the original contract is null and void the minute the debt is sold. Now it is buyer beware for the third party debt purchaser…how they can have any legal claim without a contract…….

Hi One Guy,

Oftentimes, when you sign a credit contract with a creditor, there is a clause within whereby the debtor agrees that the creditor may sell the debt. If such wording exists in your contract, you agree to deal with third party debt purchasers and when they buy your bad debt, they can legally go after you for it and you legally owe them. If it is within the SOL, then they can take you to court.

What cannot happen is, everytime this debt is purchased, the C/A may NOT update your credit bureau. The date of last activity is the date that you last paid your account or otherwise any activity on your account was recorded. This does NOT include when the debt was purchased or re-purchased. If they do this, then they extend the 6 years that bad debt is on your report, and they are liable. This is also the reason why paying off debt after the SOL can come back to bite you in the butt. It re-starts the SOL and the date of last activity, thus thrusting the 6 year time limit that bad debt can be on your report back to square one. It's silly, really, because it encourages people NOT to pay what they owe. I think that it should be changed - to what, I dunno.

Finally, the C/A must prove that they are legally entitled to collect from you. This is where Monty Loree's kit will come in handy. You can also do searches on this forum for cease and desist letters, letters requesting validation from C/A's that this debt is valid and that they are legally entitled to collect in your province, etc.

Also, Millie P is extremely helpful and knowledgeable in this area and has been an immense help not only to me, but to many other people here who joined for help on their credit issues. I've asked him for clarification on a number of matters and, each time, he's been an asset. Cut people here some slack. I know this area of law is confusing and our rights often as convoluted as statute language, but be patient. There is lots to learn here, and the knowledge well runs deep. :)

This quote from Monty Loree on this site is the reason I ask this question

"Do you need to legally deal with collection agency in the first place? Are you obligated to put up with these collection agency calls? Maybe not.. I will talk about that with my system."

So instead of your open ended answers saying that that is the way it is and too bad. Why don't you reply with Fact and legal precedent!!!

It sounds like you're looking for a technicality that does not exist.

Collection agencies do not need YOUR permission to post something on your credit report, if they required this permission no one would ever allow them to do so (can you imagine? "Hi, this is XYZ Collections, we'd like to post two derogatory items on your credit report, can we have your authorization?".)

Millie explained this well. Debts are sold all the time.

Read Millie's reply/post again, it deals with this.

The question I guess would be how would the agency legally be able to enforce this debt. Once they purchased it they fall under the same buyer beware guidelines as everybody else. If they cannot show that they have permission from the debtor they can not even post comments on the debtor’s credit rating. How could they go about collecting on a debt if the debtor never agreed to dealing with them?