Re: Re: Bad, bad gut in Heck, Butch, I'm not fighting. I'm just having a very tough time trying to figure out how it can be that such an icon of morality and righteousness can defend an industry so morally corrupt that it routinely steals huge sums of money from little kiddies nationwide and still claim to be "professional" and "ethical" in their business dealings. I don't think there is a rational answer to that question.
new letter Thanks Butch! I keep reading... I figure about the time I know it all a law will pass and it will all change. I got a new and improved letter from CA in the mail today telling me that they will withhold collection efforts for 10 days while I choose how I'd like to pay. When I send the validation letter should I demand proof of both accounts they are reporting?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Bad, bad gut in Thanks, but I do want to make it clear that I'm not making the claim that just because they force parents to pay their just debts they steal from little kiddies in the process. Not at all. I'm talking about wide spread actual proveable theft from the parents and they being people who owed the slimeballs not even one crying dime in the first place. And its not just one collection agency we are talking about here either. I'm talking about an industry wide problem that is currently being investigated by government and it sure sounds to me like something is going to be done to put a stop to it. So this isn't just some whine by someone who obviously has an agenda and an axe to grind. This isn't about a petty little fights between people here on creditnet. This is about what the City of New York City has found out about and is fixing to take action to put a stop to and what is likely to become a national scandal of sorts. Its just about enough to outrage the sensibilities of most decent human beings.
Re: new letter Well, my thinking is that in those kinds of situations you should send two separate letters, one for each account and that they should be spaced maybe at least 10 days apart. Doing so could very easily double the chances they will violate twice in a row which would help you establish a case against them.
Re: new letter If I were you, I'd go the validation route and in it, state that they're reporting it twice and include the appropriate quotes of the FCRA regarding reporting. You have nothing to lose: if they're going to sue you validation likely won't trigger it. If they're not going to then validation gives you possible leverage against them... If they come back with validation but keep reporting the debt twice, you have them on a fcra violation at the minimum. that then gives you some leverage. If you first send the validation letter, get the green card back, then dispute the trade lines with the credit bureaus (and hopefully get RMA to "verify" the trade lines before they provide you with proof of the debt).. then you have them on fdcpa continued collection efforts without providing validation. Odds are you might get a letter or 2 after your validation request too... more fdcpa violations. then you have leverage. You can then write the atty about the violations and let her know you'll hold her liable for the RMA violations. If you live your life forever in fear she'll sue, you just suck up bad credit for 7 years and then maybe get sued anyway and eat a judgment notation for another 7 (nobody should have to pay for any debt for 14 years on their reports)... If you do get sued but have them on fcra/fdcpa violations then you have some ammo for a countersuit. If the amount is less than several thousand dollars then they now take the chance of losing money on the deal. If you file in Federal court the atty will have to hire an atty herself (adds to her costs) and again, you have her spending more time and money on a debt she's likely not to collect on anytime soon... you get the idea. If you owe some money but not all of it, you have leverage for a settlement with full deletions. If you take it to court and still lose, at least you go down with a good fight. It's better to deal with the issue one way or another, get it over with, take the hit on the credit report (or not, depending on what happens).. but put it behind you so you can continue on with life without that fear of possibly being sued hanging over you. It is odd she didn't just sue you, I agree. Telling I think. She instead is blackmailing you via the notations on your credit report hoping you'll eventually need those cleared and pay her... If you have any notes or letters about the discrepency in billing, find them and have them handy. Start taking notes. Also, if I were you and you don't get a good resolution from your letters, I'd file a complaint with the state bar. Yes, it might take years, yes.. lawyers protect their own... but it would at least give you a bit more leverage, and again, if she does get the money that she's overcharging you... at least there will be a notice of an issue so you might prevent someone else from hiring her (or if someone else has the same issue, it certainly shows the bar assn that this atty has an issue with correctly billing clients)... it's an ethical issue here too, not just financial. On the upside, you'll learn the fdcpa and the fcra and you'll be able to better protect yourself in the future from other credit issues...even if you pay something you'll get a great credit education for it by researching and learning your rights the hard part is you know you're going against an atty who will likely fight you... so you'll have to Cowboy up and fight hard, most likely... just up to you how you want to face life... tackle it full on or hide and hope the sky doesn't fall in on you. Personally, I'd rather fight even if I lose Good luck!
Re: Re: Bad, bad gut in Sorry, forgot what this conversation was about for a sec. They would think you owed two debts for $2600 each. That's still bad and it still needs to be taken care of, but they're not going to think it's a judgment if it doesn't say judgment. If someone did make this mistake, you still wouldn't be able to say that it was because they thought it was a judgment or if it was because of the unpaid debt. Both are bad. I'm not sure what you mean by that. Do you mean the name of the company or the type of the account? Whatever else you do, I really think you need to follow through on that complaint with the state bar disputing her fees. Do that in addition to whatever other strategy you choose. Can I go back to fighting with Bill now?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bad, bad gut instinct Never happened on my watch. Our policy was a flat "no" with no negotiation. I've heard some people say this can be done, but I'm skeptical. I've heard other people say that it doesn't hurt to ask, but don't count on it. That it's much easier to pay the debt, then dispute it after its paid and the creditor doesn't care anymore.
Re: Re: Re: Bad, bad gut in Why not just say I support the rape of virgins, the kicking of puppies and the drowning of kittens? There is no rational answer to an irrational question. If you check over this thread, you will notice that I havn't said anything against the goals here. I've only questioned your claims and methods.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Bad, bad gut in So as has been pointed out so eloquently by many posters already, you have an agenda. Or are you just trying to fight a battle of wits?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bad, ba If you want to split that hair a little finer, I'll lend you my razor. The point is you said... ...where so far the collection agency hasn't done anything but ignore this debt for five years. How are you going to bust them on FDCPA violations when the only thing they're doing wrong is reporting this twice? Let's see, so far you've said I'm still a bill collector in disguise, that I'm a troll for the collection agencies sent here to discredit you personally(ego), that I was such a terrible collector that I got shifted from agency to agency because none of them wanted to keep me, and now you're saying that I frequently blew past the FDCPA and just managed never to get caught in three years. I'm sure I've left out something. I think I'll start keeping a list of all the outrageous, unfounded, paranoid things you say about me.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Have a ball, break a leg, be my guest. Whatever When debt collectors break the law, there is no law; just a struggle for survival. Or at least that's they way they look at it.
