California - Judgement satisfied but original creditor refuses to update court record

[SoopremeBeing]

California

I have a judgement on my credit report that is still being reported as Unsatisfied. However, I have a letter from my original creditor, Capital One, that states my account was paid in full. The amount was for $2,282. I have asked Capital One several times to update the information with the California Courts, and they refuse to do so. I have tried to dispute the information via the credit bureaus, but without success. I am unable to go through the original lawyers that were on the case back in 2007, as they are now out of business. I have already tried to file initial paperwork with the court, only to be told that my case is not a Small Claims case, so I cannot use any of the SC forms. Essentially, I need to do this myself. I need advice on which forms I need to file with the Civil courts in order to dismiss the case, or to show proof that this judgement was paid in full.

 

[FlyingRon]

Did you follow the procedure here:
http://www.courts.ca.gov/1184.htm

 

[justalayman]

You mention that your account with your original creditor is paid in full. If there was a successor creditor and that is who obtained the judgment, what happens with the original creditor is irrelevant. For a judgement to be reported paid, you have to pay the judgment creditor. Have you paid the judgment creditor everything ordered in the judgement, including any interest that may have accrued since the judgment was entered?

 

[SoopremeBeing]

You mention that your account with your original creditor is paid in full. If there was a successor creditor and that is who obtained the judgment, what happens with the original creditor is irrelevant. For a judgement to be reported paid, you have to pay the judgment creditor. Have you paid the judgment creditor everything ordered in the judgement, including any interest that may have accrued since the judgment was entered?

Yes sir I have. The paid in full letter is from Capital One themselves.

My court file in and of itself is a mess: The original Capital one lawyers I dealt with, E&K, was bought out by a company called Mann Brackens, which later went out of business in 2009 I believe. So right now, instead of E&K being on the court docket, there is a 3rd company on my case, (F,F,&G) that I have never dealt with. I called their office and they do not have my file; the only thing they were able to tell me was that the employee handling the case worked for E&K in the beginning, and then later worked for FF&G. From what I understand is that all files were destroyed or discarded once Mann Brackens went out of business, and did not transfer once the employees went to new firms.

And Capital One admitted that the satisfaction was never done in 2011 like it should have been.

 

[justalayman]

Yes sir I have. The paid in full letter is from Capital One themselves.

My court file in and of itself is a mess: The original Capital one lawyers I dealt with, E&K, was bought out by a company called Mann Brackens, which later went out of business in 2009 I believe. So right now, instead of E&K being on the court docket, there is a 3rd company on my case, (F,F,&G) that I have never dealt with. I called their office and they do not have my file; the only thing they were able to tell me was that the employee handling the case worked for E&K in the beginning, and then later worked for FF&G. From what I understand is that all files were destroyed or discarded once Mann Brackens went out of business, and did not transfer once the employees went to new firms.

And Capital One admitted that the satisfaction was never done in 2011 like it should have been.

I do not understand your inclusion of the attorney firms. They are irrelevant other than they represented the plaintiff (assuming Capital One was the actual plaintiff as you state). The attorney of record is meaningless. The plaintiff is the entity liable to ensure the proper documents are filed and it is they you would petition the court to demand action from.

So, go to the link flyingron provided and follow the directions there. If you are sending notice of your demands to act, you send it to the judgement creditor (the plaintiff in the suit) which based on your statements, should be Capital One. There are directions on how to obtain a satisfaction of judgment if you have proof as well that would not involved communicating with the judgment creditor.

 

[SoopremeBeing]

I do not understand your inclusion of the attorney firms. They are irrelevant other than they represented the plaintiff (assuming Capital One was the actual plaintiff as you state). The attorney of record is meaningless. The plaintiff is the entity liable to ensure the proper documents are filed and it is they you would petition the court to demand action from.

So, go to the link flyingron provided and follow the directions there. If you are sending notice of your demands to act, you send it to the judgement creditor (the plaintiff in the suit) which based on your statements, should be Capital One. There are directions on how to obtain a satisfaction of judgment if you have proof as well that would not involved communicating with the judgment creditor.

I have contacted several CA lawyers about this issue, and I have been directed several times to contact the lawyer, even though it is an impossibility. It really wasn't relevant to the question, but I included those details to avoid the "talk to Capital One's lawyers to file the paperwork" answer. I just wanted to include each detail so those answering can have a complete picture of what is going on.

I already completed the first 2 steps on the link that flyingron provided; I sent the certified letter to Cap One back in September. The court returned my 1st batch of paperwork, they said the form I used was for Small Claims cases, and that my case was not a Small Claims case. Right now, I am filling out the General Declaration form and will be mailing it out tomorrow. Hopefully they will not return it this time.

 

[justalayman]

whenever an entity is represented by legal counsel it is appropriate, and in the case of a lawyer being the one making contact, required the counsel be the point of contact. That is when they are represented. In your situation, since the firm of record is no longer a functional entity, as far as you are concerned unless and until notified otherwise, the judgment creditor is not represented by counsel and as such, contacting capital one directly would be appropriate, and even more so, necessary due to no known legal representative.

just to reinforce this:

the judgement creditor is the entity your actions are concerning. While they may have counsel, that does not alter who the other party is in your issue. If you make contact with Capital One and they refer you to their current counsel, your proper point of contact would be that entity but still, the other party in any filing you may make would remain Capital One. Only if there is a need to name the other party's counsel would the name of the attorney or firm be required.