OC validation- not required

you sent validation. 30 days past- no response-VIOLATION, If they did not mark it as disputed while under investigation-VIOLATION

Send Estoppel, see what happens. Be sure and give them infor from report. let them know u intend to sue if it is not removed.

I would start 30 days again, then BBB, FTC, AG. Then work on my lawsuit. They are steady racking up violations.

 

creditman, how are they racking up violations?? OC dont need to validation, FDCPA doesn't effect them.

 

OC's are not held accountable to the FDCPA which stipulates validation within 30 days. The FDCPA applies to CA's in this instance. The OC doesn't have to validate, only abide by the FCRA {60 day dispute}.

If they have hired a collection agency or the account has been transfered or sold, then the FDCPA would be valid.

If you wish to directly validate an OC, file a lawsuit in district court and then subpoena their records or perform interrogatories.

It'a always best, IMHO, to use social engineering to get the info you want, if you truly are trying to see if the account is yours and not trying to dodge payment and derog's.

 

Sorry, misread post. thought it was CA.

 

thx for clearing it up, LIZ.

 

Added LizardKings answer to the FAQ.

http://a1248.svwh.net/BoardFAQ.htm#OriginalCreditor

Read Doc's OC contribution below that also.

-Peace, Dave

 

The FCBA is specific on timeframes for disputes, so it isn't the answer to all OC disputes. If you haven't disputed within 60 of the supposed billing error, they still don't have to respond.

Gib

 

Basically they don't need to send Verification period.

 

They are still bound by the FCRA, and they do have to respond.

§ 623. Responsibilities of furnishers of information to consumer reporting agencies [15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2]

(a) Duty of furnishers of information to provide accurate information.

(1) Prohibition.

(A) Reporting information with actual knowledge of errors. A person shall not furnish any information relating to a consumer to any consumer reporting agency if the person knows or consciously avoids knowing that the information is inaccurate.

(B) Reporting information after notice and confirmation of errors. A person shall not furnish information relating to a consumer to any consumer reporting agency if

(i) the person has been notified by the consumer, at the address specified by the person for such notices, that specific information is inaccurate; and

(ii) the information is, in fact, inaccurate.

(C) No address requirement. A person who clearly and conspicuously specifies to the consumer an address for notices referred to in subparagraph (B) shall not be subject to subparagraph (A); however, nothing in subparagraph (B) shall require a person to specify such an address.


If a consumer sends a request for validation of a debt that an OC is reporting (to the OC), the OC cannot simply ignore the consumers request (as what was done to the original poster). The OC, according to section 623 (a)(1)(B) cannot report disputed information to the CRA's (such as late pays) and by doing so (still reporting) is a violation.

Here:

(3) Duty to provide notice of dispute. If the completeness or accuracy of any information furnished by any person to any consumer reporting agency is disputed to such person by a consumer, the person may not furnish the information to any consumer reporting agency without notice that such information is disputed by the consumer.


The FCRA also says the OC has 30 days to complete their investigation. So, an ideal to make this "work" would be for the consumer to send a validation letter (modified so as to not reference the FDCPA, but still include facts from the FCRA, and making reference that the OC needs to prove what they are reporting is true) to OC and also dispute through the CRA after the consumer receives the signed green card back from the OC. That way, the OC is now locked into a 30 day time frame.

 

Ok Mindcrime, I really needed this information, I really appreciate this! I have a case coming up on the 9th and I can use this.

 

True Mindcrime they are bound by the FCRA to respond to validation of the debt. Good summation of actions to modify the validation for FCRA. I included that in the FAQ too.

-Peace, Dave

 

Thank you Dave

 

I don't believe they do have to validate...even under the FCRA. However, if they are reporting it incorrectly, they are liable under the FCRA. Unfortunately, it often takes a lawsuit to get any type of response from an OC and unless you are positive it was either not your account or that it is being reported incorrectly, its hard to know whether or not you have anything actionable.


Just my opinion....


L

 

I would have to disagree...If ANYONE says I owe a debt I should be able to have them prove the validity of that debt. I would say that there is a much better chance the OC could show up in court with the requested information (than, say the CA could), and the claims for violations may not be actionable because they would have proof of the debt (the validation I was re requesting all along)...but I can not see them being able to skate the whole validation process altogether.

There is ambiguity as to whether or not a consumer can request a disputed item directly with the creditor...Here is something from the Watkins FCRA opinion letter:

Section 623(a)(1)(B) forbids furnishers from continuing to report inaccurate information that is disputed by consumers in writing to the address provided by the furnisher (using the procedure you cited). In addition, Section 623(b) imposes clear investigative duties on furnishers when they receive disputes from CRAs, and allows consumers to sue violators of this subsection to obtain damages (which may be punitive if the consumer shows willful violation) and attorney fees. Prior to the addition of Section 623 in 1996, the FCRA provided for none of those duties or liabilities on furnishers of information to CRAs.

-Peace, Dave

 

I would send them another letter, quoting section 623, and advising them that you believe the info reported to be incorrect and if they don't provide proof or correct it with the cra's, then you will be forced to exercise your legal rights.