I have a situation where a local CA did not provide adequate validation for two separate medical collections. While estoppel is usually recommended as the next step, I am thinking that in my case I should immediately sue them in federal court. Here are the circumstances: I have two medical collections reporting to all three CRAs, one for $238 in 8-02 and the other for $53 in 7-01. These were both assigned to a local CA. I have already offered five times to pay these accounts in full in exchange for a deletion. However, the two OCs involved each refused my offer and said that I had to deal directly with the CA. The CA has twice refused to accept payment in full for a deletion. When I asked why they would not delete, the CA supervisor said that I "didn't pay the bill and therefore needed to suffer the consequences." One other point is that these collections are for two different kids who were seen in the emergency room. The only papers I signed were the ER forms which I can't find a copy of. However, the collections are not from the ER but from outside providers (i.e. reading the x-rays) and I don't know if my signed ER authorization carries through to them. Last month I requested validation (outside the original 30-day window) of both accounts and also disputed as "not mine" with all three CRAs. I sent the CA the standard validation letter found in the Sample Letters. The CA did not list the accounts as being in dispute. Instead, the CA verified both accounts with all three CRAs and then sent me the following bogus "validation" letter: 1. The letter is written on the CA's letterhead and begins by saying "I will provide you with relevant information to validate the accounts pursuant to the act." 2. The letter then answers the various questions from the standard form in the Sample Letters that I attached to the validation letter (creditor's name & address, account number, amount owed, etc.) 3. THAT IS ALL THEY SENT ME FOR VALIDATION. 4. They did not send a computer printout showing any account information. 5. They did not provide anything with my signature. 6. They did not provide anything from the OC. 7. The account numbers in the letter do not match the account numbers showing on the credit reports (the CRs contain additional digits). 8. The letter states an incorrect amount owed on one account which is $42 higher than the amount being reported to all three CRAs, with no explanation as to why. 9. The letter does not identify the patient (my son) for whom I supposedly signed and accepted responsibility as guarantor. 10. The validation letter contains the miranda in bold type: "This is an attempt to collect a debt and any information obtained will be used for that purpose." This is obviously an inadequate validation, but I am hesitant to send the estoppel because that will only give them another chance to get it right. I am leaning towards immediately filing suit in federal court for the following "alleged" violations: 1. Failure to list the account as being in dispute (2 accounts x 3 CRAs x $1000 = $6000) 2. Continued collection activity without providing proper validation of the debt (2 accounts x $1000 = $2000) 3. False representation of the amount of the debt (1 account x $1000 = $1000) 4. Failure to inform me of my right to dispute the debt (1 account x $1000 = $1000): I don't recall ever being notified in writing of the older debt, and even indicated in my validation letter that they had failed to notify me prior to placing it on my credit report. I'm sure they'll come up with the original letter they sent, but I will honestly say that I did not receive it in the mail. 5. Actual damages. I applied for a mortgage refinance and got turned down, but I'm not sure I want the CA to know that I'm trying to get a new mortgage as that will only make them fight harder to keep the collections on my CRs. This represents a lawsuit in federal court for $10,000. I would offer to settle for $1000 plus deletion of both accounts on all CRs. I could even send a copy of the suit to the OCs, inform them that they could be held liable for the CA's actions, and request that they immediately have the accounts deleted. I doubt that the CA would want to fight this $10,000 suit in federal court over the hope of receiving their small collection percentage of the $238 and $53 accounts. Here are my questions: Did the CA provide adequate validation of these accounts? What do you think of this strategy, i.e. should I send the estoppel or go directly to court with their inaccurate and incomplete validation in hand? Have I correctly identified the violations and calculated the amount to sue for? Thanks in advance for your opinions.
Your not going to be able to get more than $1000 per lawsuit in punitive damages. The FDCPA states: (2) (A) in the case of any action by an individual, such additional damages as the court may allow, but not exceeding $1,000 But, if you were denied mortgage due to the collection agencies reporting invalidated accounts, and you could prove it, you could sue them for the amount of the house you were purchasing. That would make the CA sh*t a brick. I think this would be what you should file suit for and not the punitive damages. Send an offer to settle along with the summons that they will eat the debt and remove the accounts from your reports in exchange for a dismissal with predjudice.
That's a good point. I am limited to $1000 in punitive damages per lawsuit. However, if I have four distinct causes of action (#1-4 above), could I then file four separate lawsuits for $1000 each? That might be enough to make them settle for a deletion. Proving damages for being denied the mortgage refinance would be tricky. In October 2002 I disputed the $53 collection as "incorrect balance" which was subsequently verified by Equifax. I applied for the mortgage in November 2002 (after Equifax had verified the account balance) and was turned down because of low FICO scores. I didn't officially request validation from the CA until January 2003 which was two months after I had applied for the mortgage. However, in a way I was denied the mortgage due to the CA reporting an invalidated account. IF THEY CAN'T VALIDATE THE ACCOUNT NOW, THEN WHY DID THEY VERIFY THE BALANCE TWO MONTHS EARLIER? If the CA verifies the information to Equifax in November then they had better be able to validate the account in January, right? The collection caused my middle FICO score to drop below 620 which disqualified me for the mortgage. I am now stuck with my original mortgage at 8.75 APR when I could have otherwise refinanced at around 6.0 APR on my $200,000 home in November 2002. These figures might allow me to estimate my "damages" from the CA reporting an invalidated account. One additional question: If I claim actual damages in the lawsuit, do I have to go into great detail in the summons as to how the damages were calculated and how the CA's actions caused those damages? If not, then perhaps I could sue for a substantial amount (say $20,000) and scare the CA enough to force a deletion in exchange for dropping the lawsuit. My point is that if they THINK that I MIGHT actually be able to prove that amount in front of the judge, then they will run for the hills. But if they know I'm bluffing and can't prove actual damages, then they will just laugh at me.
The balance on the account may very well be correct regardless of whether or not it belongs to you. After all you did not dispute the account as not mine. In doing credit repair, I've learned that to get companies on violations, things need to occur in a specific order. I suggest: 1) dispute the account with all three CRA's as not mine 2) pull your equifax FICO score while the account is in dispute. The CA accounts should not show up in the scoring model. 3) after the cra's verify that the account belongs to you, pull your FICO again. *Boom* you just got how much they are damaging you with. 4) re-apply with the mortgage co. make sure you get a denial letter or something stating the reason you were turned down was due to the collection account. 5) sue the CA and nail their cajones to the wall for the full price of the mortgage.
I DID dispute both accounts as "not mine" with all three CRAs as soon as the validation letter green cards came back. The CA then verified both accounts as being mine without providing the proper validation. I agree that there is a correct order to do things if one is simply trying to nail the CA and collect damages. However, that is not my primary goal here. My goal is to get these two collections off my credit reports ASAP because they are holding up the refinancing of my existing 8.75% mortgage. Every day that passes is money going down the drain. I need to refinance before the rates go back up, and would just as soon get a decent interest rate as not. I offered to pay them in full for a deletion, but they refused. I requested validation and disputed with the CRAs as "not mine" but they verified and provided me with this bogus validation. I was hoping that a lawsuit would get them to delete and just wanted to fashion the lawsuit (based on the existing facts) so that it will have the most impact. My original question was whether the CA had properly validated these accounts and what my next step should be. From everything I've read on this board, they sent me a bunch of sh*t and have racked up several FCRA & FDCPA violations. If that is true, then it would appear that I have the following options: (1) Send estoppel (and give them another chance to do a correct validation = BAD IDEA) (2) File a lawsuit for $1000 punitive damages (3) File a lawsuit for actual damages related to the denied mortgage (in which case I have to estimate some damages and be prepared to prove them) (4) File 4 separate lawsuits based on 4 separate causes of action for $1000 punitive damages each I am willing to try whatever has the best chance of convincing the CA to remove the collections from my credit reports ASAP. I am not wanting to apply for additional mortgages and get turned down, as that will only lower my FICO scores even more and delay the entire process of refinancing. Rather, I want to apply for a mortgage and get approved at a decent interest rate. Since the bogus validation they sent already contains GROSS ERRORS, I was thinking...sue them right now before they have a chance to correct the errors! I appreciate all of your input. Remember, I am trying to get these collections off my report ASAP so I can refinance my 8.75% mortgage ASAP. If the lawsuit is the best way to go then that's where I'm headed, but just wanted a second opinion. Thanks.
When I asked why they would not delete, the CA supervisor said that I "didn't pay the bill and therefore needed to ." suffer the consequences. greenvan =============== They need to suffer the consequences of your law suit. This is harassment
1*but I am hesitant to send the estoppel because that will only give them another chance to get it right. 2*Here are my questions: Did the CA provide adequate validation of these accounts? 3*-should I send the estoppel or go directly to court with their inaccurate and incomplete validation in hand greenvan =================== 1*After as many chances as they have had do you really think estoppel will make any difference? 2*What validation???? There wasn't any!!!! 3*Send the estoppel.Afte 15 days sue them if they don't comply.
Last month I requested validation (outside the original 30-day window) greenvan ============ Forget the 30 days it has nothing to do with your right to demand proof. I wish people would quit letting this confuse them.
Re: Re: Bogus validation--should I sue? 1*I agree that there is a correct order to do things if one is simply trying to nail the CA and collect damages. ) 2* File a lawsuit for $1000 punitive damages 3* File a lawsuit for actual damages related to the denied mortgage (in which case I have to estimate some damages and be prepared to prove them) 4* File 4 separate lawsuits based on 4 separate causes of action for $1000 punitive damages each 5*Send estoppel (and give them another chance to do a correct validation = BAD IDEA) ===========greenvan ============= ========================= 1* You are suing the CA for Violations of the FDCPA at $1000.oo per violation 2*Not for $1000 in punitive damages per action under FCRA. 3*This would be in addition to #1 above. 4*No need to do this as you aren't suing under Cause of Action based on the FCRA But rather you are suing for actual violations that the CA has committed under the FDCPA. 5*Good NOT bad as it is the final step you need to take before filing suit.
Re: Re: Bogus validation--should I sue? Wow there are a lot of questions there. Have you researched exactly what is validation on medical accounts? You do realize that if you take it to court all of those charges will likely be reduced to a maximum of $1000? Like LB said the chances are slim they will respond to the Estoppel so I would not worry about that and any additional chance you give them makes your case stronger. Lastly, you probably realize a Judge may very rule pay the CA. Heck he/she might even rule you have to pay their attorney fees. In any case good luck.
Re: Re: Bogus validation--should I sue? Let's see here. It doesn't make one iota of difference what you do or do not remember any more than it makes any difference that you were dismayed or disappointed as so many of these letters state. All of it is totally irrelevant. Not to be crass, crude and rude but if you stop and think about it, the only question is did they or did they not obey both the letter and the spirit of the law. If they failed in either then they broke the law and that's the long and the short of it. That won't help you in a court of law either. They would claim they sent it and the judge will believe them over you every time. Just don't seem fair, does it? So just in case you want to know why that is the way it is, the reason is that they are known to keep tight records of each and every thing they do and it is known that as a general rule the public does not. And that is one of the reasons that I keep harping on the importance of keeping good records of everything you do. If they say they did something their statement is automatically accepted at face value. If you say you did something you had better be fully prepared to prove each and every aspect of it. If you claim you were in the bathroom at the time of the murder you better have the paperwork to prove it. (LOL) I would worry a whole lot more about proving damages than how hard they will fight. I'm not sure you can even get a case in court for $10,000. Better to state "punitive damages in whatever amount the court will allow" and let the court decide. If you told them $10 grand and the RCP in your district said the least you could sue for was say $25 grand you just might make yourself look like you may not be the sharpest tool in the shed and give them even more reason to fight you. I'd go for the estoppel. No matter how far off the wall and out to lunch it may be it does get deletions sometimes. Remember that in order to have standing to sue you need to establish that you have exhausted all of your administrative remedies prior to filing suit. While both lawyers and pro se litigants may or may not know the law you can bet your boots that all federal judges do know the law. Those folks don't fool around and if you don't have your ducks all in a row they will run you out of the court room real quick.
Re: Re: Bogus validation--should I sue? Medical collection are the biggest load of crap in the world. My child was hurt at six flag last july. We took him to childrens hospital in Akron and thought the bill was paid. 2 weeks ago my attorney told me six flags was ready to settle(nothing huge) but they noticed the hospital was still owed $30 by us. I have tried over 20 times to reach billing and nobody picked up the phone. One time I put it on speaker phone and let it ring almost an hour and a half and nothing. Well today I get a pay from them pretty strongly worded berating me for not paying a bill and threatening me with collections. No word at the hospital about this. Not one single letter of phone call. I get nothing from the insurance company or either attorneys. This stuff happens all the time and I wish some law would pass that says you either bill the client in x amount of days or you lose. None of this sending to collections 2 years later and ruining your credit report for a bill you never got. Now monday I will run down there and bitch them out.
Re: Re: Bogus validation--should I sue? OK! Good show. Just don't forget to take your attack trained cat with you. (LOL) Just kidding.
Re: Re: Bogus validation--should I sue? Thanks, I appreciate all of your comments. Lbrown, you seem to be of the opinion that I should take my chances at $1000 per FDCPA violation. Pnwman, I think your opinion is that I have more to lose than gain by taking this to court, and would likely end up paying the CA and their attorney fees. Bbauer, your post is a bit more cryptic but I believe you are saying the following: (a) I didn't keep good enough records or create the proper paper trail to prove to a judge that the CA failed to notify me in writing of the older debt prior to placing it on my credit report. Therefore, I would likely lose on this issue. (b) I should say "punitive damages in whatever amount the court will allow" rather than stating a specific dollar amount. (c) In order to have standing to sue, I first need to exhaust all administrative remedies (i.e. estoppel) prior to filing suit. Since the amounts are only $238 and $53, I can easily pay these if the CA will only agree to delete. Therefore, I am wondering if I should try one more time to negotiate payment in full for a deletion. Here is what I had in mind: 1. Send estoppel to CA with 15 day deadline 2. Include settlement offer with 15 day deadline 3. Forward copy of settlement offer to the OCs If this fails, then I would file suit on day 16 and take it from there. From what everyone is saying, I get the impression that I would be better off trying to negotiate a settlement on this rather than having it wind up in court. What do you think?
Re: Re: Bogus validation--should I sue? What a bunch of jerks, those CA's...make you suffer the consqequences. What is that? I settled with all my medicals for deletion but one, who had a similar attitude. They deleted with validation, but your CA seems to carry a "grudge." Perhaps they caught a glimpse of you **streaking** the other day on CNET?? I think you should send a follow-up letter (estoppel as bb says) with a "I mean business" attitude in it. I sent a validation....enclosed is a copy of my cccr that you jerks received it....ignored my request for validation.....didn't mark account in dispute....clear violation of FDCPA.....I demand this account immediately be deleted from your files...... BTW, if you live in California, you **can request** injunctive relief in small claims (if that is the court you want to go to).
Re: Re: Bogus validation--should I sue? Streaking??? That was a great thread Cinderella, but somehow it got deleted... When the board was down on Friday, me and spyguyjim were the only ones who figured out how to "break in" to Credit Talk. Everyone else was locked up in the General Lounge trying to figure out how we got in! The panic in the General Lounge was hilarious! So you think I should forego the settlement offer and just send them a hard-hitting notice of violations and demand for deletion? Interesting... BTW, I have her on tape saying that I needed to "suffer the consequences" for whatever that might be worth.
Re: Re: Bogus validation--should I sue? Basically, I tend to think so. I mean, after all, how much is a fight worth in this case? I think the westcap endorsement may be the best answer, but I would do it a step at a time. I'd prepare the certified bank cashier's check for the $53 first and see what happens. If you don't hear anything from them for about 30 days you should then check with the company that issued the bank's check and see if it got cashed or not. If it did then check your credit report to see if its been deleted or not and if not then go for the lawsuit. You should win that hands down on breach of contract. If they refuse the check then tell them to go pound sand. If its cashed and gone off your credit report then do the big check the same way. Then do the exact same things as you did for the little check. Remember the principle of the camel's nose under the edge of the tent? If he can get his nose under the edge of the tent its not going to be long before the whole durn camel is going to be inside the tent.
Re: Re: Re: Bogus validation--should I sue? Bill, Should I send the $53 cashier's check with westcap endorsement to the CA or to the OC? The OC still owns the debt, but the CA is reporting it and the CA will also be receiving the estoppel letter. Thanks.
Re: Re: Re: Bogus validation--should I sue? That might be a bit of a tough call but I tend to think it would have to go to the CA because any payment would have to go to the CA. So why would the endorsement change that? But I sure would not send the estoppel because that would probably goof it up. And while that should get rid of the listing from the CA it may not get rid of the OC if they are reporting too. The westcap is designed to go to the OC but will work just as well with the CA. So I would send it to the CA and not any estoppels.
Re: Re: Re: Bogus validation--should I sue? The westcap endorsement is simply hand-printed in small lettering within the endorsement area on the back of the cashiers check, is that right? Also, does a cover letter need to be included with the payment? This has probably been addressed in another thread, so I apologize for asking again but I want to make sure I have the latest technique. Thanks.
