I always ask for the signed contract and all statements during the time the account was open. In the last situation, where I actually had to pay for them, I asked for the contract and the last four statements. L
A friend of mine purchased a car a few years back, he never made a payment on it and obviously it was repossessed (sp). Well the CA decided to take him to court AFTER the SOL was up. My friend hired an attorney and their defense was the SOL was up. Know how this ended? The judge asked my friend if the signature on the contract was his, and my friend responded "yes". Teh judge said, then I don't care if it is past the SOL, it is your obligation to pay the loan so pay it! The judge awarded the judgement to the CA. So don't always think the SOL is a solid defense! Sorry this thread reminded me of it. Just because it worked for someone else, doesn't mean it will work for you is what I am trying to say!
That's a good point, however the SOL defense is considered an absolute defense. I hope your friend filed an appeal. When a judge overrides the law you don't have to take it.
So how would one go about adding this to the validation ltr? Or would we add it to the estoppel? Should I just include reference to Spears v. Brennan and the docket #. Or do I need more than that?
Don't add anything to either one.Why help the CA validate when what you want them to do is fail to do so?
It's not so much that I want to help the CA in the validation process, I just want to shove as much legal "stuff" in front of their faces so they will just back off and not want to even bother pursuring the situation.
I agree with LBrown here. Keep it out of either one. I prefer simple rather than complicated legal letters. Just enough to make your point. If you are sending a Validation letter they would NOT have sent you only a signed contract as validation (you have not asked yet). So you would definitely NOT want to cloud up the validation request with unnecessary rhetoric. Keep it outta validation letters. If you are sending the estopple letter, it is because they FAILED to respond to the validation, or possibly responded without adequate proof, so this is where you COULD include some comments about this case. For instance if they DO validate with only a signed contract (not a history of payments and delinquencies) then I would MAYBE use this in a request to demand further validation, something to back up a future lawsuit, that I demanded a higher degree of proof during validation than I received. Watch out though...if they have a signed contract you may very easily find yourself filing a frivolous lawsuit so be careful when dealing with CA's with signed contracts....at that time I would consult an attorney before considering my next step. -Peace, Dave
A signed contract won't prove the CAs claim without Accurate and complete accounting. Filing suit in this case would not be frivolous.right?
Only if that is ALL they had. They might reply to the validation letter with the signed contract but actually have more evidence. You COULD request a higher level of evidence...I am not sure the above ruling provides that you are due that in validation, only that it was required in this case since there was a contract without further proof of payment history provided as verification, AND the CA continued to get the default judgement (ie FURTHER collection activity occurred after the response) without any further evidence of payment history/delinquencies etc...I would assume that they had more on my file if they had the original signed contract...again if that were ALL they had then you are correct. But watch your step. I would want to consult an attorney before I did anything further, if I received a signed contract as validation. Just my suggestion. -Peace, Dave
Auto repos and filing for deficiency judgments have different SOL's than other debts in some States,the judge may have been more knowledgable than the lawyer for your friend.
Unfortunately, no. Its a long complicated story. He signed for a loan and then forged his ex-wifes signature as a co-signer (his ex wife and I are friends too). When they went to court the CA was claiming this was a CC debt and not an auto loan. Apparently, both lawyers agreed this wasn't the ex-wife's signature (the hubby never admitted forgery in court), so she was clear of it. The defense was SOL was up and the judge basically said tough shit. Instead of paying th $10K (or something like that) the hubby agreed to pay $2K in exchange for deletion. Which he hasn't paid. This is STILL on the ex-wifes CR and she has since bought a house, I told her to sue the CA. She won't.
Okay...so this is the situation.....there are two collection accounts. I sent out validation letters and they sent them back (after their 30 days but in 30 days nonetheless)....they sent me the last copy of my bill from the original creditor. Nothing with my signature, etc. How do I proceed? I've already sent Estoppel letters but they did not reference the Spears case.
R! Wow. Look what all happened while I was at work today! And you know what? I am seriously going to use this Spears v Brennan thing - AND U is *in* Indiana, how can they ignore that? I want proof!! So, LKH, you really don't think that we should acknowledge receipt of records? Won't that look kinda shady to a judge? I am going to acknowledge mine, (when I get it), apparently U does have a good reputation with all the libraries. I did get some good news today though, a letter in the mail stating that a paid collections account I protested was deleted from ALL THREE reports, which I am pretty happy about. I wonder if some of these guys in the collection industry know what's going on, but once they have some good reason to kick it off they will if its paid. Maybe they aren't all grinches. I am in a pretty good mood.
Lizardking is not LKH. I believe Lizardking is saying he would not acknowledge receipt IF they fail to send CRRR. After all, they have no proof you received the validation. Even more, they have no proof they sent any response to the validation at all, without CRRR. I agree with you though, if you request the validation and send them the return address contact information, I would acknowledge receipt. It is up to you. -Peace, Dave
Thnx for the link Robin, I submited the link to Christine over at Bayhouse in thought that it might make some interesting reading and to seek what her interpretation of this case might be. I believe she runs a site called CreditCourt.com and posted a break down of her interpretation of this case, If anyone cares to look at it(she brings up some interesting points) Take care all Kinetix http://creditcourt.com/law/fdcpa-spears.shtml
I think it depends on what your claim is. If you are claiming "not mine", then obviously a signed contract would establish the debt as yours. If you are saying the balance is incorrect, then just as obviously a signed contract alone would not be sufficient. L
2*The only thing a contract establishes is the fact that at some point in time there was some sort of an agreement between two parties.It does not prove that there is a debt.
