Hello All, I just received a response from a paid ca after using Bill's Knockout estoppell, along with some of my own personal touches (plaintiff statement) This was sent on Feb 24, 2003 via fax and certified mail. Well today, I received a response. Basically he stated that he needs more information to complete an thorough investigation. The statement that I don't like is : If you are claiming that this is not your accountm for example that we have the wrong social security numberm that you never had service with XYB OC, or whatever we will be more than happy to delete it from your credit. The next statement that has me boggled is this: Insofar as your purported reliance on Civil Code Section 1785.26 and other sections you quote we are very aware of the legal requirements of those sections and we have fully complied with each and every legal requirement. In regard to this particular section of the Civil Code we complied with that section on 4-17-00 when we sent you a notice fully detailing actions that would be taken in the event of non payment. (COCK AND BULL, NEVER GOT A NOTICE) Further with reference to your statement tha we are liable under 15 USC 1692K please tell us what provisions of the FDCPA you are alleging we ahve violated. Again I will be happy to fully investigate these issues and give you a prompt response very truly yours agent from hell Scumbag CA INC
As I have plainly stated on my message board where you got the estoppel, it is pure bunk and an effort to bamboozle, obfuscate and flimflam. Then I go on to state that if it works fine if not you can cry a lot. In your case you laid it on someone who obviously realized that. Now you should wait at least a few days and try Psychedoc's nutcase series. That too may require you to purchase an even bigger supply of hankies or it may cause them to wake up and die right realizing that fiddling with you is more trouble than it is worth. Or they may just ignore you. Makes no difference what their answer is, all you want to do is get results if at all possible.
Well my question is what direction should I give him to start a bogus investigation? I am not giving my social security number or any help to investigate. If they can't investigate, then why do they continue to verify my information with the cra? So I have re-read the nutcase and the son of a nutcase letter and at this point, I want a deletion, pure and simple..(I am a potential future old curmudgeon)
Since your next move should be Doc's letter series I think you should be getting help from Doc on this one. I never presume to speak for Doc. He is a great guy and has his own outlook on things and especially when it comes to something he authored. I'm sure he will gladly come over here and give you whatever help and suggestions he may have. I'm just not qualified to give you any opinions on Doc's letters. He will probably be here in a flash as soon as somebody alerts him. He's just that way. A real prince of a guy.
Re: Re: BBauer, Vets.help since this is a PAID collection I would think if you keep swamping them with work i.e. Bills letter and DOCS series..that they should eventually fold. Anyway, the logic is sound.
Re: Re: BBauer, Vets.help That is what I was thinking too. If this continues I may start up my "call a day" process. This normally re-inforces the fact that I am a real fruitcake. This is also a combo with letters.
Re: Re: BBauer, Vets.help You might want to ramble while on the phone and giggle like a lunatic. Oh and dont forget to address "mother" while on the phone in your best "psycho" voice. --------------------------------------------------------- "No mother, this is a PAID chargeoff. I will not invite them to stay over!"
Re: Re: Re: BBauer, Vets.help LMAO..I must incorporate this in my routine. I am a girl so I am not sure about a psycho voice for me.
Re: Re: Re: BBauer, Vets.help Well then just cackle like some old witch..heeheehee..Yes dearies...I need you to research something. Will a salamnders tail help? heeheehee.. LOL
Re: Re: Re: BBauer, Vets.help Well one company already believes I am off my rocker. I just started to an approach of constant harrassment. I do this between work and school. I have about an hour (phone time). Next time I am going to do the cackling and then maybe a loud blow horn. Do you think they will remove after a couple of weeks of this.
Re: Re: Re: BBauer, Vets.help You could subscribe to magazines using their names and addresses, lol. Also, why is it not safe to assume that if they dont respond in 30 days, YOUR claims are valid...isnt this what thy do to us?
Re: Re: Re: BBauer, Vets.help Nope, they MUST validate. Everyone here is giving you bad advice. You don't use the estoppel, you use the validation letter or nutcase letter and tell them that you want them to validate. Just because you didn't answer their initial communication, doesn't mean you admit it to be yours. Its in the FTC opinion letters as well ! You can use the NUTCASE letter and give them 5 days to respond. It works, I beat 3 collection agencies using it, you just have to go from giving them 30 days to respond, (which sounds like you already did) to 5 days, to 48 hours and then be ready to file a lawsuit. I'd be happy to help you....to prove to this Billie Bauer joke that it works!
Re: Re: Re: Re: BBauer, Vets.help That is against the law, just in case you contemplated doing that for real!
Re: Re: Re: BBauer, Vets.help LMAO. CN is a great place for a much needed afternoon laugh. I'm going to go cackle at FCNB for awhile!
Re: Re: Re: BBauer, Vets.help helpwanted, as for the bad advice. --------------------------------------------------------- "since this is a PAID collection I would think if you keep swamping them with work i.e. Bills letter and DOCS series..that they should eventually fold. Anyway, the logic is sound." ------------------------------------------------------- The rest was just in jest...The acting crazy portion of the thread was made in referance to sending the "nutcase" letter..then trying to prove youre really a nut!LOL!!! We were just kidding.
Re: Re: Re: BBauer, Vets.help The nutcase series is what these bastards are responding to. I just sent off this little gem to them: I using California FDCPA Scumbag Collection Agency 666 Scum Avenu California *** Dear Mr. Agent from Hell, On January 17, 2003, a letter was sent to your company and signed for on January 24, 2003, this letter requested a signed contract or evidence to support that this alleged liability was owed to your company. As of today, February 26, 2003, I have not received any documentation, which would validate this alleged liability. Yet, your company has verified this information with Equifax, Experian and Trans Union with expediency and impunity. As of February 24, 2003, Equifax and Trans Union are still conducting a re-investigation. The basis of my complaint is clearly outlined by California Civil Code 1785.30. (A signed and notarized letter along with a signed certified mail receipt date January 24, 2003) 1785.30. Upon notification of the results of a consumer credit reporting agency's reinvestigation pursuant to Section 1785.16, an consumer may make a written demand on any person furnishing information to the consumer credit reporting agency to correct any information which the consumer believes to be inaccurate. The person upon whom the written demand is made shall acknowledge the demand within 30 days. The date of my subsequent letter and plaintiff statement is dated February 24, 2003. Of which you have initiated a response. (f) Upon receiving notice of a dispute noticed pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 1785.16 with regard to the completeness or accuracy of any information provided to a consumer credit reporting agency, the person that provided the information shall (1) complete an investigation with respect to the disputed information and report to the consumer credit reporting agency the results of that investigation before the end of the 30-business-day period beginning on the date the consumer credit reporting agency receives the notice of dispute from the consumer in accordance with subdivision (a) of Section 1785.16 and (2) review relevant information submitted to it. As of today, this provision has not been addressed or even documented upon my credit reports. This item is disputed. In fact a Procedure letter to Equifax merited a response that they contacted your corporate headquarters and received verification. Your statement of â?? If you are claiming that this account was not your account please send me a detailed explanation of the basis of your claim and I will be glad to fully investigate the matter.â? Since you have verified this information with the Credit Bureaus on what is now â??numerous occasionsâ?, it would stand to reason that you have already concluded an investigation and one would hope a thorough investigation. My demand is deletion of the alleged liabilities from all three credit-reporting agency and $3000 compensation for violation of the above listed items. Paid or Fully Paid still constitutes an agreement between your company and myself. If this is so, please provide the continuously requested validation. Poor me, Cc: California Department of Consumer Affairs Cc: Better Business Bureau
Re: Re: Re: BBauer, Vets.help IMO, you are asking for too much. You are basically telling them that you demand deletion AND $3,000. You are leaving them no option but to call your bluff. If you just tell them that they should delete it if they can't prove it, then you at least give them an opportunity to back away. With threating that you want BOTH pieces of cake, you are giving them no option but to stand firm! Also, you are giving them waaaaaay too much information about different civil codes and specifics on what they have committed violations in. You should be more vague and make them figure out what they are doing wrong. If they start trying to figure out what they are doing wrong, and don't find the problem, they may end up thinking that you have them somewhere where they aren't looking. That is when you sue for violations of the FDCPA, FCRA etc.... etc.... without quoting specifics. Anyway, it may be too late already, I guess you have demanded too much too soon! You tried the get rich approach and it may have backfired!
Re: Re: Re: Re: BBauer, Vets.help again, I don't mean to belittle anyone, but it IS bad advice. They aren't bothered by these letters unless they are pointed at a particular person. You need an inside contact. Get that person and send all letters to them ONLY! It can be handled WITHOUT a barrage of letters and wasted money sending CRRR and/or FAXES. I have handled all of my CA's with 1 or 2 letters at most. After that you give them the 48 hour routine and then you send them the sample lawsuit papers. I have never gotten to the 48 hours, so I know from what I have learned from the people and my own investigations and letter writing that they do respond AND delete if you give them the opportunity to do so.
Re: Re: Re: Re: BBauer, Vets.help The issue is this, I have been vague on numerous occasions. This is not the first letter, I nutcased/validated, validated again, estoppel, etc. So this company is essentially trying to BS me until I go away. What can they do? Nothing. My reasoning is this, the only response I received is from the Estoppell and Plaintiff Statement. I am also in California, and the issue I am pointing out to them is the obvious. The validation letter I sent was basic (thanks Bbauer) Dear Scumbag CA, Can you please send me proof that I owe this debt. If no proof, remove it from my credit report. Account number:666444 Thanks in advance Poor schmoo (me)
