I need opinions on this. I have a CA that is reporting something that first off, was supposedly opened in 1998 but the report states that they have been reporting it to the CRA's since 1997. I contacted them via fax which I verbally confirmed they received on 8/2/02. Since that, they have reverified the debt as accurate with the CRA's (EX, & EQ) and have changed the status to now be "Collection Account." I called them (I know, I know - but wait) to see if they had received my fax, which they stated they had and then the person I spoke with proceeded to tell me some pretty astounding things. 1. "We are not responsible for making sure the debt is yours, or that the information we are reporting is *accurate* (MUCH sarcasm in his voice). That is a customer service issue and we are not customer service - we are a collection agency." 2. "This will never come off of your credit report. We can make it stay on there forever." 3. "I don't have time to play games with you lady, are you going to pay this or not?" 4. "The window for verification/validation was in 1998 when we first started billing you. You missed it and you have no rights under the FCRA or FDCPA regarding this debt, even though you think you know this stuff - you don't." Now, in the meantime the OC has not responded to the CRA to verify the debt and it has been deleted. I want to know if I should go NUTCASE/PSYCHO on these people. What are your opinions?
first of all he lied.... but before you start disputing/validating you should already know this.. have you read the fcra and the fdcpa? the nutcase letter is for paid collection accounts... you should attempt to validate this account (irregardless of what ca says) if they do not respond to validation send estopple letter... if they verified accounts to cra w/o validation they have violate and you have the basis for a lawsuit (beginning basis)
Well, yes. I should have said a nutcase/psycho variation. (Don't you hate when you know what you mean but seem to have a hard time saying it! LOL) In any case - some type of psycho letter that lets them know that I am not going for it. I have been perusing through the FCRA and FDCPA again and there is much to be used in there in this instance. All I want from them is for them to either provide the information that prooves this is mine, or delete the stinking account. Does anyone have a letter that would be similar to what I am talking about? Any help is appreciated.
I would start with written validation. Wait thirty days and if they ignore, send it again giving them fifteen days. If they ignore...send a version of the estoppel letter and if they still ignore, fax them a copy of the complaint you intend to file. This will get bumped to their compliance department to someone know does know the FDCPA (you will have created enough of a papertrail to stand up in court hopefully by this point) who will then very nicely agree to delete the account in order to resolve the sitation. This is the best scenario and works quite well in my experience...although there is the occasional CA who does not cooperate who has to be sued before they will correct anything. L
Thanks Whyspers. Funny thing is they say they don't have to validate. They say it doesn't apply to them and that it will take 3 - 4 months since the account is so old. I guess I will continue to wait.
That's the problem with verbal conversations, CaliGirl, send them the validation letter anyway and let them put it in writing. Sassy
Sorryyyyyyyyyyyyyy charlie ;-), Not validating is a good thing, no reporting without the dispute notation and no collection activity. I just meant that having them verbally say they won't do something or don't have to do something isn't as good as having your documentation in place and organized for future action against them for the violations. A dispute as to the validity can be oral -- I can't figure how you can prove it, save a recording device. CA: Yes your honor I did say I wouldn't, couldn't, and didn't have to -- I also made a note that the claim was disputed, see right here in my notes, I even highlighted it! LOL Sassy
