What constitues "validation"?

You can demand anything you want (just like they can demand that you pay them) but that doesn't mean you (or they) are obliged to comply. 15 U.S.C. 1692g(b) says all they need to do to "validate" the debt is obtain verification of the debt or any copy of a judgment, or the name and address of the original creditor and mail a copy of that to you. That's it. No contract, no list of payments and credits, no notice of assignment, none of that. So asking for all that stuff just makes it look like you're on a rant. *copied from previous post*

If the original company didn't provide services as outlined in an agreement/contract why haven't you sued them for a breach if thats the case?

 

The bottom line answer is: they have to provide what the judge you're in front deems "proper validation".

The essence of validation is assuring that you are the correct person who owes the debt, and that the amount owed is accurate (that it includes any payments you made, etc.). The law regarding validation was written with the intention of avoiding incorrect identity of debtor, and accounting for proper balance owed.

Note that if you had a consumer issue with the original business/creditor, then you should have documented the issue in writing to them. You have 60 days to file a dispute under consumer laws.

 

Can't you request the original contract for the card with your signature on it?

 

You can ask for whatever you want and they might even send it. But, it doesn't take much to meet the validation requirements of the FDCPA so they can report it on your credit report.

 

What I think we have here regarding "validation" is a discrepancy of its purpose. The numerous posts for this question all contain a question about the "reporting aspect", i.e, if they don't provide "proper" validation, then they have to remove the negative entry. This is not the (realistic) case.

Looking at the collection of the debt only, if you are "challenging" the validation, then you are affirming that:
1) You are NOT the "John Doe" that owes this debt (wrong person/identity), or
2) This is NOT the amount I owe (per my records and evidence).

There is a degree of common sense required here, if a CC company takes you to court for a debt, and they provide your name and SS#, as well as a complete address, then it is pretty reasonable to assume you ae the correct person.

Next, businesses are usually accurate in calculating an owed debt. Again, if you disagree with the number, you need to provide evidence supporting your accounting.

So, beause a firm does not seem to provide iron clad evidence of your responsibility for the debt, that does not mean they must automatically pull the tradeline from your credit report. As previously posted, what they are "legally" required to provide you (provided you have acted in accordance with the laws of the FDCPA/FCRA) is pretty light.

Now, if you take them to court, what they MAY have to provide could be a different scenario, and that will depend upon what it takes to make the judge reasonably assured you owe that debt.

Again I digress that the "art of credit repair" has pushed this approach to new levels. A simple "request" for validation can legally be answered with name and address of original creditor. Now if you "dispute" this debt, say as belonging to another person, and demand full evidence that you owe it, that "could" be another story.

My point is, those working on their credit need to be fully aware of what "validation" really is, and how to use it, and not expect it to be a miracle tool of removal and/or making debt go away.

 

Re: Validation

This is a good overview of the process:

http://www.creditinfocenter.com/rebuild/debt_validation.shtml

Also, the FDCPA explains what validation means and what you are entitled to.

The Mezines FTC Opinion Letter States the following:

 

Hello,

The problem I'm having is that I cannot get either the collection agent nor the reporting credit bureau to tell me the name of the original creditor I supposedly owe money to, or any other information. I do not recognize what they are referring to nor do I recognize ever having owed the amount they are stating. With all my inquiries, I only repeatedly get a form letter saying there was an investigation and it has been verified that the account belongs to me, which I do not believe any of.

I do not have money to spend on attorneys, and I think that is just one of the things these people are after anyway. It's alot like computer hackers; they get their kicks by making us miserable and wasting our time and money (even if the money does not go to them), and sometimes that is all they want or need out of it.

I have FINALLY gotten at least Experian to delete one of the two CA's that are doing this to me. I would think that if either of these are legitimate accounts that I have actually owed money on, they would be only too happy to tell me who I originally owed this to. The fact that they are keeping everything so covert and secret only adds to my suspicion of them.

Has anyone come up against this before, and if so, have you been successful in doing anything about it? Equifax is the worst of all, and they tell me to contact the collection agency for this information. The collection agency only sends a form letter with absolutely no helpful or necessary information. If it is my actual right to know, then what can I do about it?

Thanks for any help.

 

I think a lot of us have.

The CRA's are only obligated to provide the contact information of the subscriber who listed the negative TL's.

The CRA's don't do actual verifications and investigations unless a law suit is eminent, and even then they might not comply with the law.

CA's/JDB's hardly ever comply with the law unless under threat of law suits and even then they are notorious for dragging their feet.

The first thing you need to realize is that this will take time and that there is a process for getting results (more on that later). It can be done - I have been successful in a similar situation, but it took a long time.

First off, how old are these accounts that are listed?
Do they list when the account went to collection? Usually they supply the name of the original creditor in the remarks/comments section? You're saying that they didn't do this, right.
Is there a Judgment involved?
How much do they say you owe them?
Who are the collection agencies?
Have they EVER made contact with you before?

Once we know the facts, we can help and provide a course of action.

A

 

The whole problem is that they will not and do not say/ list the name of the supposed original creditor, nor the date it went to supposed collections, nor the original amount.

I have sent two registered letters in an attempt to obtain this information, but all I get in return are form letters without the answers. They just want "x" amount of money from me, with no explanation of why or to whom I supposedly ever owed it in the first place.

The first I ever heard of it was when I was turned down for credit and sent for my free reports. I had never heard of these two collectors, nor had I ever heard "from" them. They never contacted me once to inform me I owed anything, nor was I ever informed I was in collections for anything. It suddenly appeared on my report.

I think what is happening is there are very disreputable agencies who find closed/paid-in-full accounts from years back, and try to con a person into thinking they didn't actually finish paying. But even then, how does that work if they won't tell me who it was I never finished paying? The one agency I have had successfully removed from my report is someone who was doing this, but this second place will not divulge any information, and the whole thing wreaks of illegalities and con games to me.

It appears to be so very suspicious that they are doing this. If it was a true, legitimate account and I really did owe something, I would think they'd be only too happy to answer the questions of who it is they are collecting for, and what was the original amount and date of transaction.

Does "judgment" mean if it went to court? Hopefully, I would at least be notified if that ever happens, but so far, not.

Why would you want me to post the names of the agencies and the amounts they say I owe? It would make me a little uncomfortable to do so on the internet. What really gets me is that the CRA isn't required to state who the original creditor is and the original date of transaction. It makes it open to just anybody to say anything they want, and claim a debt that doesn't exist, and the consumer can't even dispute or clear it up if there is no original creditor.

Thanks,
D

 

P.S.

My first and foremost question is: Can the CRA continue to show this collector when neither they nor the collector will tell me the name of the original creditor or the date/amount of original transaction?

They keep referring me back and forth to each other, with neither of them giving me this very basic information, without which I cannot clear the matter up.

 

Did you follow the link that I posted above which is helpful in understanding how to use the 'Validation" process to your advantage?

Look at this: http://www.creditinfocenter.com/rebuild/debt_validation_workflow.shtml

The problem here is that there are requirements imposed by the law. In order to get releif, you need to dispute the debt with the CRA's, and request VALIDATION from the CA. Wait 30 days and do it again. Do this one more time. The assumption here is that they will not validate.

Each time you dispute and they VERIFY to the CRA and DON'T VALIDATE to you, it's an FDCPA violation.

What you want to do is build up a HISTORY OF WILLFUL NON-COMPLIANCE for each of the CA's. After you have done this you send each of the CA's AND their REGISTERED AGENTS an ITS letter siting the violations of the FDCPA. At the same time send a complaint letter to the FTC and Attorney General where the CA's parent office is for violation of your consumer rights and unfair debt collection practices (Send the accumulated documentation along as backup). Cc the CA on each of these complaints.

After you have done the above, write a letter to each of the CRA's demanding deletion of the listing because the CA's have not provided any proof of the debt - a violation. (Send them the documentation and all of the letters you wrote). Don't expect the CRA's to do anything though. If nothing is done, send them each an ITS letter for failing to comply with the FCRA.

You have built a documented trail of non-compliance because you have the letters and the CMRRR Green Cards for each request for Validation.

This is the attitude and process. Specific law citations are available in "sample letters" here and on other sites.

Get educated on the law and its remedies. Get educated on the process. Expect that it will take some time to get results.

Good luck!

A

 

Thanks for all that info; I'm sure it will help! However, I have read stories across the internet which say that even after all this horrendous labor and all the waiting and time lapse, and even after successfully getting these leaches removed from the CR's, the same people show up again with a different amount, etc. It's like a never-ending battle. I'm chronically ill and cannot deal with so much. I need peace of mind and a quiet, relaxing lifestyle now. This is all long-term stress which is counterproductive.

When you say they must send me verification after an investigation, don't they consider the form letter to be just that, even though it tells me nothing? I do not think the laws are on our side at all. We would have to spend more money than these people are trying to bilk out of us just to take them to court.

On one of the other entries, I have been able to ascertain they have used a psuedonym for the original creditor, who is also listed separately under they name by which I knew them. They have stated on my report "Pays As Agreed/ Account Closed At Consumer's Request", with no reports of ever being late or being in arrears nor that the account went to collections.

I'm putting together a letter now that points this out to the CA, and sending a copy to the CRA, but I don't think it will keep them off permanently. Given what I've read from other posters at certain 'blog' sites, I can probably expect them to pop up again. I will also get a written statement from the original creditor that will prove they do not have me in collections, but I think it will only serve best as a cover letter for any future credit applications.

The conclusion I've come to on this is that it is best to ONLY purchase things with cash, or save up for them with cash. When something like these two CA's is persistent and won't go away, and the unusual need arises that I might have my credit report checked (I'm looking into moving to a retirement apartment in the next two years and I know they will check everything), then I will have this documentation to show them at the time of application. I'm also printing out a lot of other posts with complaints about the exact same two CA's that I'm battling at this time. I think this is the best advantage I can give myself.

I would also say that if there is a collection entry on my credit report, then there should be a corresponding entry somewhere else on my report from the original creditor which states they sent the account to collections. This would give a cross-match, and without that there are no checks and balances. These are all going to be good things to point out to future potential creditors, but from now on I will buy with CASH, which I usually do anyway; I have had very few charge accounts through my younger or middle adult years.

Thanks,
D

 

I hope that this helps

A

 

I would have thought and hoped that the CRAs would feel the same way. This is why I say it should not even be permissible for just anyone to place themselves on a person's credit report without stating who they represent, the original date of transaction and original amount of transaction. It makes no sense and allows any criminal to set themselves up as a debt collector.

There is no statement anywhere that the OC ever sent my account to collections, nor would there have been any reason for them to do so. I think this has to do with my earlier comment that there are disreputal collection agencies - they are really bogus in my opinion - who inquire of a person's credit history, find an account that has been closed, then set themselves up as the collector of a supposedly, though bogus, balance due on that account. They are hoping the person will not be able to remember or still have in their possession, the records to prove otherwise.

This is all I can see happening here, just like with the other one that has been what they call "deleted" from one of the CRAs. It isn't actually deleted, though. I was able to make my case that it wasn't my account, but what they have done is they've changed the balance due to "$0" but are keeping the balance owed with a statement of "charged off", so as to make it look like they gave up on ever collecting from me, when instead the account should be totally expunged from the entire record because there was never anything legal or rightful for them to collect from me. They had taken a place who had gone out of business, with whom I had previously had a charge account but it was paid in full, and they tried to make it look like I still owed something. I have been seeing more and more cases of this happening to people.

Thanks again very much for your help; I will add what you said to my letters.

D

 

Lasering it down to the basics!

Argento - Those points are key, thank you for spelling it out so clearly. This information is golden.
I have one collection on my Experian report, not on Equifax or TU...that is currently being investigated (a letter was sent) by a firm that I hired. I'm waiting for the results. Note: I have decided to no longer retain this firm.
If by some chance the item doesn't get deleted, then I will self dispute as the next step.

 

Argento,

I believe I understand what you're saying here, but don't I have these people on all the necessary technicalities right at the beginning just because they broke all the collection rules and protocols? If they were required to inform me in writing within five days of any supposed assignment to them for collection, they did not do that.

Once I found out about them and wrote them, they have responded twice and continue to refuse to tell me this basic information that you have listed, which is supposed to be mandatory on their part.

D

 

...then take 'em to court and shake some money outta them!

 

Dmystified,

You need to learn and understand the mindset of the CRA's and their subscribers (OC's and CA's/JDB's). They conspire together to keep you from exercising the law to fix items on your CR's that ar incomplete or flat out wrong. Therefore, we are in an adversarial relationship with them.

Yes you may have them on technicalities. You can immediately send the CA's an ITS letter and prepare to do battle, but make sure that your facts are straight. This is why I take my time and build up a pattern of "willful non-compliance" that any court will understand.

Right now my guess is that the CA doesn't think that you are going to do anything and is not inclined to respond to you. However, if you send them a couple more DV requests and Dispute to the CRA's at the same time, you can very shortly thereafter send them a letter that says,
"This is a Notification of Intent to Sue for Violations of the FDCPA"

If you have a pattern of FDCPA violations then you will get their attention.

However, in rereading your initial post, it appears to me that your issue may be contractual rather than a collection. I don't know the details, but based on what you wrote,

CA provided a contract I signed, however, quit paying and returned all the materials due to them not providing the services outlined in the agreement.

you did not receive services that you paid for and you returned a product/materials and stopped paying.

You need to consider the following:
--Is the debt valid? Remember, you have a right to have the debt validated.
--Was the product/service defective?
--Are the collection fees and interest rates higher than the state allows? See your state collection laws for info.

Did you ever contact the OC regarding the dispute? What did the contract say about returning product/materials?

So if you did not comply with the terms of the contract then the OC may have recourse to retrieve monies that are owed.

Is the CA working directly for the OC, or has the OC sold the debt?

If the OC has not sold the debt then I would try contacting the OC to see if there is a way to work things out, which would include recalling the debt from the CA and having the negative TL removed from your CR.

BTW, how old is this debt?

A

 

Argento,

It appears that you have me confused with someone else. What you quoted here:

was not posted by me, but by the originator of this thread, ztwegna.

My issue is that someone has taken a closed account from several years back and is fraudulently claiming they have me in collections for a past-due amount. As I said in my own post, my credit report shows that the original creditor lists me with a zero balance, a notation that I pay as agreed and that the account was closed at my request.

It is my own contention, as you say, that these people are not on our side, and I understand all this only too well. It is out of my bounds to take anyone to court, but I do want them to stop all this nonsense. My letters to them are pointing out where and how they have violated the laws which are on my side, so they will have to back down and remove themselves from my report/s.

D