Help ME////Validation/Letter

Discussion in 'Credit Talk' started by matt_r, Mar 17, 2002.

  1. matt_r

    matt_r Well-Known Member

    I received the second resonse to the round of validations I sent a couple weeks ago from Asset Acceptance (the first was from Affiliated Accep.).

    I wasn't surprised to find that all they sent was a printout, which I understand is pretty common. So, I want to move forward.

    Now, I spent a long time last night searching the boards on how to proceed, but get mixed signals from what I'm reading. Some people seem to think I should send a second validation request and ignore what they sent me, while others say just send the estoppel, maybe the Wollman opinion letter with it.

    I would prefer to address the lack of validation directly with Asset Accep. I know where the debt is from (Discover), but according to my reports it is with two different CAs (AssetA. & NCO) and I just need to sort things out.

    I can't seem to find a sample letter on the board that addresses printouts, the wollman letter and estoppel all in one shot. Does ayone have anything like that, or any other sample letter they think would work?

    I know this is pretty routine (getting printouts from CAs, I mean) so I'm sure someone has a good letter out there and I would like it if they would share it with me. If you like, just email it to me or post it on the board.

    Thanks for your help.
     
  2. whyspers

    whyspers Well-Known Member

    I know a lot of people are using the Wollman letter to say that a computer printout isn't proper validation and that has been held to be true in some cases. I would definately argue that, but wouldn't count on it too much if I had to go to court.

    Some courts have held that a computer printout is routinely accepted for the filing of insurance claims, etc. and because of that is an acceptable form of validation. I wouldn't just ignore it and move on to estoppel. In the one case where I received the printout, I sent them back a letter thanking them, but telling them that was not what I was looking for. I then mentioned the Wollman opinion letter and that I was looking for the signed contract, along with statements of the account during the time it was open. (They ended up providing what I asked for...but that's another story...lol). If you ignore what they send, the court might say the company used good faith in sending the printout and the lawsuit is frivilous and dismiss the case and make you pay for their attorney fees.

    I can only access New York and Federal cases on Lexis (have to pay extra for other states) so that's where I read this.


    L
     
  3. matt_r

    matt_r Well-Known Member

    So would you say that the most appropriate action at this point would be to re-iterate my request with a followup letter?

    Estoppel seems more like it's geared towards a CA that does NOT respond to your validation request. I also looked up "Validation" in the FDCPA and it doesn't really specify what constitutes an acceptable debt validation.
     
  4. whyspers

    whyspers Well-Known Member

    I would, but I know a lot of others here feel differently. I don't know which way is the best way to go...I just know what I a comfortable with. Judges like to see you give every opportunity to work things out before resorting to litigation.



    L
     
  5. Candi

    Candi Well-Known Member

    This is what I send. I attach a copy of "Wollman" with it and I have not gotten a computer printout since I started useing it.

    Jane doe â?? 15254 validation way slc, utah 84098
    creditor
    address
    city, state & zip
    February 28, 2002
    Re: Account # xxxxxxxxxxxx
    To Whom It May Concern:
    It has come to my attention through the credit reporting agencies that you claim I owe you a debt. I am distressed that you have failed to follow the law and notify me of this alleged debt prior to placing it on my credit report. I hope you will take care of this matter immediately.
    This is a request for validation made pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Please complete the attached form and follow its instructions and your claim will be processed as soon as the information is received. This is not a refusal to pay but a request for validation. In case you are unclear as to what constitutes validation I have enclosed a FTC opinion letter, this will save you the time of mailing me a computer generated printout.
    Please be advised that I am not requesting â??verificationâ? that you have my mailing address, I am requesting a â??validationâ?, that is, competent evidence that I have some contractual obligation to pay you, specifically the alleged contract or other instrument bearing my signature.
    You should also be aware that reporting such invalidated information to major credit bureaus might constitute fraud under Federal and State Law. You may wish to consult with a competent legal advisor before your next communication with me.
    Please also be aware that I am considering legal action against you for:
    · Violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act
    · Violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
    · Defamation of Character
    · Negligent Enablement of Identity Fraud
    Pending the outcome of my investigation of any evidence that you submit, you are instructed to take no action that could be detrimental to any of my credit reports. Under the FDCPA, once a consumer attempts validation of an alleged debt, all collection activity must cease and desist. This includes listing any account with a credit reporting repository that is inaccurate and invalidated. If you do not respond to this validation request within 30 days from the date of this request, all references to this account must be completely removed from my credit file.
    I would also like to request, in writing, that your office make no telephone contact to my home or to my place of employment. If your office attempts telephone communication with me it will be considered harassment and I will have no choice but to file suit. All future communications with me MUST be done in writing and sent to the address noted at the top of this letter.
    I suggest that you and (original creditor) get your records in order before I have to target you for legal action
    Regards,

    Cc: (Attorney name here), Esq.

    CREDITOR/DEBT COLLECTOR DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
    Name and Address of Creditor: ____________________________________________________
    Name of Debtor: _______________________________________________________________
    Account #: ___________________________________________________________________
    Address of Debtor: _____________________________________________________________
    Amount of debt purported to be owed: ______________________________________________
    Date alleged debt became payable: ________________________________________________
    Was this debt assigned to debt collector or purchased? ________________________________
    Amount paid if debt was purchased: ________________________________________________
    Commission for debt collector if collection efforts are successful: _________________________
    · Please attach a copy of the agreement with your client that grants you the authority to collect this alleged debt.
    · Please attach a copy of any signed agreement debtor has made with debt collector, or other verifiable proof that debtor has a contractual obligation to pay debt collector.
    · Please attach a copy of any agreement that bears the signature of debtor, wherein he/she agreed to pay creditor.
    · Please attach copies of all statements while this account was open.
    Have any insurance claims been made by any creditor regarding this account? YES NO
    Have any judgments been obtained by any creditor regarding this account? YES NO
    Please provide the name and address of the bonding agent for ( collection agency), in case legal action becomes necessary:
    __________________________________________________

    ___________________________ ________________________
    Authorized Signature For Creditor Date

    Please return this completed form and attach all requested information, assignment or other transfer agreements, which would establish your right to collect this alleged debt within 30 days from the date of this letter. Your claim cannot be considered if any portion of this form is not completed and returned with copies of all requested documents. This is a request for validation made pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. If you do not respond as required by law, your claim will not be considered and you may be liable for damages for continued collection efforts. Please allow 30 days for processing after I receive this information back.
     
  6. matt_r

    matt_r Well-Known Member

    That's pretty much the same letter I sent to them. I specifically mentioned in my letter that computer printouts were not acceptable...I wanted a copy of the contract as well as statements and docs showing they have the legal right to collect from me.

    Yet, despite my efforts, I still received a printout and a form letter stating "they look forward to working with me..." Blah, blah, blah.

    I guess I'll just get a little more wordy and send a follow up letter.

    One thing though: should I wait until the full 30 days has elapsed before seding my second request? I sent the orig request via fax on 3/5.

    Thanks.
     
  7. Candi

    Candi Well-Known Member

    Since you have already sent a validation request I would re-send a demand for validation with the "wollman" letter.
    whyspers is right about the different opinions. I do think the "wollman letter" is pretty clear though. The reason for not accepting a printout for proof is that anyone can walk into a office and say they are you. Of coarse a bank or whatever would not just believe someone and give you some cash, they would ask for ID and definitley make you sign a contract. That is what you want, a signature or real proof. If the debt is valid they should have that.
     
  8. parkslorra

    parkslorra Member

    I'm dealing with Asset Acceptance Corp. located in Warren MI. I've been doing some research and found out that they are not licenses. If you are located in the state they are allow to do interstate collections. If you are in another state and they are attempting to collect they are in violation of Michigan Public Act 299 of 1988 Article 9.
     
  9. LKH

    LKH Well-Known Member

    Candi,

    I asked the FTC directly about this same subject. Reporting to the cra's prior to notifying the debtor. I was told there is no law that they must contact a debtor prior to reporting it. That completely sucks, but when they told me that, I called back and spoke to another person at the FTC and was told the same thing.

    Just an FYI. Maybe you should call and ask yourself prior to sending out any more validations just to be on the safe side.
     
  10. whyspers

    whyspers Well-Known Member

    LKH, I agree...BUT....lol....

    It isn't the reporting of the debt prior to notifying that I think violates the law, but rather the not providing notice.

    This was one of my causes of action and I put this in my complaint:

    4. In December, 2001, Plaintiff reviewed her consumer report as maintained by Experian and noticed a debt she did not recognize was being reported by the Defendant, LJ Ross and Associates. The Plaintiff had never received any type of communication from or by the Defendant in regards to this alleged debt and Plaintiff had no knowledge of this debt. Plaintiff contends that the reporting of this alleged debt to Experian by the Defendant violated the FDCPA under § 809. Validation of debts [15 USC 1692g] Paragraph (a) which states:

    (a) Within five days after the initial communication with a consumer in connection with the collection of any debt, a debt collector shall, unless the following information is contained in the initial communication or the consumer has paid the debt, send the consumer a written notice containing --

    (1) the amount of the debt;

    (2) the name of the creditor to whom the debt is owed;

    (3) a statement that unless the consumer, within thirty days after receipt of the notice, disputes the validity of the debt, or any portion thereof, the debt will be assumed to be valid by the debt collector;

    Section 803(2) of the FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692a(2), defines the term "communication" as "the conveying of information regarding a debt directly or indirectly to any person through any medium."

    The Defendant's first communication was when Plaintiff became aware that this alleged debt was being reported by Experian and therefore she was not notified in this initial communication or within five days of same, of her rights under the FDCPA.



    L
     
  11. Candi

    Candi Well-Known Member

    Good point whyspers. I was told by someone at my state AG's office that it is a violation to report a derogatory item without prior notice to the consumer and it denied them the chance to dispute prior to the damages it caused by reporting it. Anyway as usual we won't all agree but my aproach has worked very well for me.

    Candi
     
  12. matt_r

    matt_r Well-Known Member

    Okay I did some brainstorming at Starbuck's and came up with a followup letter that directly addresses the lack of validation in their intial response to me. Could someone please look this over for me and critique it? I don't want to shoot myself in the foot by sending an inaccurate letter. Thanks in advance.

    DONT WORRY>>>>I will be sending this letter via CRRR...the first one I faxed to them.

    =====================================

    John Doe
    123 Main
    Oak Park


    Asset Acceptance Corporation
    Sandi Oster
    P.O. Box 2036
    Warren MI 48090
    Via Facsimilie @ 586-446-7838

    March 18, 2002

    RE: Acct #############/Discover

    Dear Sir/Madame:

    Thank you for your prompt response to my request for debt validation pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) dated March 5, 2002. However, I was distressed to find that the documentation I received from Asset Acceptance does not conform to the legally acceptable requirements for debt validation.

    As indicated in my initial communication to your organization, I am not requesting ¡§verification¡¨ that you have my mailing address and Social Security Number. Rather, I am requesting ¡§validation¡¨ -- competent evidence that I have some contractual obligation to pay you. As such, I regret to inform you that the computer printout your organization submitted as ¡§validation¡¨ is unacceptable. In the event that your organization is unclear as to what constitutes proper debt validation, I have included a Federal Trade Commission (FTC) opinion letter for your reference that addresses this issue; you may wish to consult with a competent legal advisor before your next communication with me.

    The purpose of this letter is to re-iterate my request for proper debt validation; be advised you have fifteen (15) calendar days to fulfill this request to avoid any further action, including possible litigation. For your convenience, I have enclosed a duplicate copy of the ¡§Creditor/Debt Collector Disclosure Statement¡¨ that was sent with my initial correspondence from March 5, 2002. This statement contains a list of documents requested for validation of the alleged debt referenced above.

    You should also be aware that reporting unsubstantiated entries to credit reporting agencies is in direct violation of the FDCPA and Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), and may constitute fraud under Federal and State Law. Pending the outcome of any evidence you submit, you are instructed to take no action that could be detrimental to any of my credit reports. Under the FDCPA, once a consumer requests validation of an alleged debt, all collection activity must cease and desist. This includes listing any account with a credit reporting agency that is inaccurate and invalid.

    Your failure to respond or satisfy this request within the requirements of the FDCPA will be construed as your absolute waiver of any and all claims against me, and your tacit agreement to compensate me for costs and attorney fees. If you do not respond to this validation request within fifteen (15) calendar days from the date of this request, all references to this account must be completely removed from my credit file.

    I would also like to request, in writing, that no telephone contact be made by your office to my home or to my place of employment. If your offices attempt telephone communication with me, it will be considered harassment and I will have no choice but to seek legal protection. All future communications with me MUST be done in writing and sent to the return address indicated on this letter.

    Sincerely,

    John Doe

    CREDITOR/DEBT COLLECTOR DISCLOSURE STATEMENT

    Name and Address of Creditor:

    Name of Debtor:

    Account #:

    Address of Debtor:

    Amount of debt purported to be owed:

    Date alleged debt became payable:

    Was this debt assigned to debt collector or purchased?

    Amount paid if debt was purchased:

    Commission for debt collector if collection efforts are successful:

    Have any insurance claims been made by any creditor regarding this account? YES NO

    Have any judgments been obtained by any creditor regarding this account? YES NO

    Please provide the name and address of the bonding agent for Asset Acceptance Corporation in case legal action becomes necessary:
    = = = = = = = = = = = = =
    PLEASE ATTACH THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION ALONG WITH A COPY OF THIS DISCLOSURE STATEMENT:
    Æ?®Æ?® A copy of any signed agreement debtor has made with debt collector, or other verifiable proof that debtor has a contractual obligation to pay debt collector

    >> A copy of any agreement that bears the signature of debtor, wherein he/she agreed to pay creditor.

    >> Copies of all statements detailing account activity while this account was open.

    >> A copy of the agreement with your client that grants Asset Acceptance Corporation the authority to collect this alleged debt.

    X
    Authorized Signature For Creditor Date

    Please return this completed form along with copies of all requested information, assignments or other transfer agreements, which would establish your right to collect this alleged debt within 30 days from the date of this letter to the address indicated below. Your claim cannot be considered if any portion of this form is not completed and returned with copies of all requested documents. This is a request for validation made pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. If you do not respond as required by law, your claim will not be considered and you may be liable for damages for continued collection efforts. Please allow 30 days for processing after I am in receipt of this information. Your reply should be directed to the following address:
    joe schmoe 123 Main Oak Park
     
  13. monij2000

    monij2000 Well-Known Member

    Matt, this looks great! Just review thoroughly and do a quick spell/grammar check prior to sending...
     
  14. cjoyner

    cjoyner Well-Known Member

    On this same subject, I received a printout in response to an estoppel sent to a CA who is reporting a medical bill. The printout they sent me is theirs, not a copy of the doctors office printout. I plan to ignore this and send them a 5 day notice, specifically addressing this incomplete validation.
     
  15. matt_r

    matt_r Well-Known Member

    I guess one of my main questions is: Where is it specified in the laws what an adequate debt validation consists of??

    The FDCPA is very vague on this subject. Yes, the Wollman letter is somewhat helpful, but it still leaves a lot of questions unanswered for me. I even checked the FCRA and it does't even mention anything about validation (I didn't think it would, though). I guess I'm just looking for some rock-solid information stating what's required. Is there such a thing???

    Otherwise I feel like I may be stepping on someone's toes. I dont want to mess around with Asset Accep without knowing exactly what I'm doing....:)

    Thanks, Matt.
     
  16. matt_r

    matt_r Well-Known Member

    Thanks for the 'heads up'. I will check into this.

    -M.
     
  17. betacredit

    betacredit Well-Known Member

    Matt

    check your email.
     
  18. betacredit

    betacredit Well-Known Member

    http://www.cis.state.mi.us

    This website has the info. on regulation. I called the office but they said the search engine is really picky. I couldn't find any licensing info. for ASSet. I really hope they are licensed for their sake.

    They gave me a 900# to call and check if ASSet is licensed. I am at work and it blocks 900# and I left my cell phone at home. :-(

    Could someone call and post the results if they get a chance? (900) 555-8374

    The company's name is Asset Acceptance Corp. aka Asset & Lee Co. The CEO's name is Rufus Reitzel and the main office is located in Warren, MI.
     
  19. ggb

    ggb Well-Known Member

    Don't 900 #s incur fees?

    If so, they're trying to CHARGE you for the info.
     
  20. whyspers

    whyspers Well-Known Member

    Betacredit...how long have they been trying to collect? There was a class action lawsuit against them in 2000 for FDCPA violations.

    2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8963, *


    ROY L. WHITE, Plaintiff, v. FINANCIAL CREDIT CORPORATION, Defendant. HAROLD BISHOP, Plaintiff, v. ASSET ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION, and BRAD BRADLEY, Defendants.


    Case No. 99 C 4023, Case No. 99 C 5001


    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, EASTERN DIVISION


    2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8963



    June 21, 2000, Decided
    June 21, 2000, Filed; June 22, 2000, Docketed

    DISPOSITION: [*1] Plaintiffs' motion for class certification granted.


    CASE SUMMARY

    PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Plaintiffs moved for class certification in a case alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C.S. § 1692 et seq., and the Credit Repair Organizations Act, 15 U.S.C.S. § 1679 et seq.


    OVERVIEW: Plaintiffs sought to represent a class of people who were mailed collection letters by defendants that stated that settlement of the debt would improve the debtor's credit rating. Plaintiffs alleged this was a false promise in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C.S. § 1692 et seq., and the Credit Repair Organizations Act, 15 U.S.C.S. § 1679 et seq. Defendants objected to class certification at the early stage of the proceedings, and challenged the typicality and commonality of the proposed class. The court held that it was not too early to rule on the certification issue, even though the merits of the case had not yet been considered. The court certified the class with a minor modification, finding that the plaintiffs had established typicality, commonality, and predominance. The possibility of a de minimus recovery due to one defendant's small net worth was not an automatic bar to class certification.


    OUTCOME: Motion for class certification was granted because plaintiffs established typicality, commonality, and predominance, and the possibility of a de minimus recovery was not an automatic bar to class certification.


    This case may still be pending...didn't check. There are actually several cases involving Asset. Will also check under their d/b/a.


    L
     

Share This Page