Help with junk debt letter...

Send back a simple, straightforward DV via certified mail (with signature card). It doesn't have to be (and should not be) anything fancy. Simple and to the point:

(Your name & address)
(CA's name & address)
(Whatever account info they sent you)
(today's date)

Dear CA, I am disputing the above-referenced alleged debt. Please validate said alleged debt and provide proof of such validation to the address above. It is inconvenient for me to receive phone calls regarding this matter. This is not a refusal to pay.

Sincerely

(Your name - do not sign)

A note about the account info: Always provide it exactly as they gave it to you, even if you know it contains errors. Why fix it for them? They saw fit to bother you over a bogus debt, so I say let them drown in their own sloppy recordkeeping!

 

Why do you want to say this? What is the reasoning behind it?

Why do you think that the letter should not be signed?

Yes, but shouldn't that same reasoning apply to all validation letters regardless of whether it is a bogus debt or not?

 

My response is simply to use the words from the FDCPA...


To whom it may concern,

I received your Validation Notice (this usually what the first letter is called but, if not, use the language from the letter) letter about account (account no.) on (date). I dispute this debt in its entirety and request validation pursuant to the FDCPA. It is inconvenient for me to take telephone calls about this account at any time and at any phone number. Please send all validation information to the address shown at the top of this letter.

Your name here.


The first sentence establishes the date you received their letter so this letter should be dated and sent no later than 30 days after that date. It is entirely likely that you didn't receive their letter for some time (e.g. you're out of town), but the date they sent it is not important. It's the date you received it so you want to establish that date.

The next sentence is right out of the FDCPA. You must dispute it AND request validation for the rest of the FDCPA protections to apply. You must also dispute it with the CA so you can then dispute any corresponding collection entry with the CRA to get them to remove the entry or give you an FDCPA violation for later.

The next sentence is also FDCPA wording. They can't call you any time or place that it's inconvenient, so be sure to use that word.

The last sentence is not based on any specific legal reference, but simply to eliminate the possibility that they might try not to send you anything claiming you said "cease communications" (another trigger phrase). I want to be clear to them and any other person who might read the letter (i.e. the judge in the FDCPA suit that I might have to bring) that I DO want to communicate; however, I want to do it in writing and through the mail and not over the phone.

Anything else is both superfluous and unnecessary (and shows that you're blindly copying letters you found on the internet). Don't feel bad, I did the same thing my first time

 

Because he's disputing the debt.

It would be a trivial task to scan the signature, Photoshop it onto a letter saying "I agree to pay the balance in full" or "I agree to binding arbitration", and claim you admitted the debt is valid. While the risk of such may be indeterminate, the FDCPA says nothing about requiring a signature on the letter, so why take the chance?

Yep.

 

And yet there are STILL other sites out there who puke out 7-page letters chock full of legal threats and "Internet Lawyer" jargon and insist that this is the only way to initiate a DV. These are most often also the sites who urge readers to sue if a DV response isn't received in 30 days and other such nonsense.

I've said it before, I'll say it again -- that's why I spend my time here. This board is far more rational than most others out there.

 

Because an unsigned letter carries no validity. The way around that is to use one of those special blue pens that can't be photocopied. That takes care of both problems. In order to do what you suggest the letter would have to be scanned into an image then loaded into photoshop and the edges showing where the signature was cut out of the original letter would have to be smudged or erased using the paint function and then saved back to an image format. After that it would then have to be printed out to a hard copy. That is a great deal of work indeed. Hardly worth the effort although I know of one case in New Mexico where a mortgage document was consumated and the man bought a high dollar home. Just about a month ago he decided to look his paperwork over and found out that the name and signature of the seller had been cut out of another document and pasted into the mortgage paperwork. At that point he ordered a fraud audit from atty Norm Bradford and that revealed much more illegal activity. That man has filed and won 6 federal lawsuits against debt collectors and the credit bureaus plus a couple of local court cases dealing with contractors who didn't do what they were supposed to do in building the home. One of them wanted him to pay $2500 for installing the sprinkler system and sued him for it when he refused to pay for it. The problem was that he didn't own the home at the time the sprinkler system was installed and hadn't ordered any sprinkler system to be put in. Of course he won that case too. The real estate agent stepped in and paid it since that was who ordered the sprinkler system to be put in. The new homeowner made the sprinkler system company pay that back to the lender in the course of the settlement. (LOL). The realtor refused the money back and the homeowner didn't want any other damages except his court costs so in the end everybody went home happy and without too much cost but at least the homeowner didn't get stuck for the bill either.

Now the homeowner is seriously looking to file a federal case against the lender who put that false signature on that loan document. He hasn't filed it yet as far as I know but I doubt it will be much longer before he does.

Of course, lenders won't allow you to use your little blue pen on loan documents but for such things as we are talking about here, OH WELL.

 

It doesn't have to be photocopied. That trick worked years ago. There is virtually nothing that can't be scanned and manipulated by a program such as Photoshop.

A script font works fine.

 

There still would validity to the letter if unsigned. Use as your signature your full name typewriten and underneath type "Signature on record" Send it CMRRR. Also, do not refer to it as their account number, refer to it as your (the CA's) reference number. The whole point is to leave them nothing in your correspondance to use as Any type of evidence. Another point always refer to it as an alledged debt.

There are a host of CA's that have been caught 'lifting' sigs from paperwork. Not just CA's though, shady autodealers, etc.

 

As for myself, if I were to need to send a DV letter I think I would just photocopy what they sent me and staple that to the DV letter and not mention the debt at all. Let them draw the obvious inference.

 

No, that's incorrect. Any CA that goes into federal court and says "Well, your honor, we did in fact receive the customer's dispute letter, but we chose not to act on it because it wasn't signed" is going to be treated about as well as any customer who goes into court and says "Well, your honor, I did in fact receive the creditor's overdue invoice but I chose not to pay it because I didn't feel like it." I would love for a CA to take me up on an unsigned dispute letter, because I'll wind up at least $1000 richer.

As for Photoshop, that's a piece of cake. Blending two shades of paper-white is nowhere near as complex as any given online Photoshop contest populated with 12-year-olds.

Anyone reading this has seen both sides of the issue, and should do as they individually see fit. I don't see any reason to sign. The law doesn't say I have to sign. The law doesn't say an unsigned notification is invalid. And no CA has ever balked at me for an unsigned letter.

 

An x with a witness is legal have it notarized.