CA sent validation that doesnt cut.

Discussion in 'Credit Talk' started by ohnostuck, Nov 15, 2001.

  1. ohnostuck

    ohnostuck Well-Known Member

    OK. Collection agency sends me back a print out. All it has on it is amount owed and my name and address. What a crock. Is that legal means of validation?

    OH and it has the date of service as 10/99. That is not even right, I closed on my house in Aug of 99 and I REALLY don't owe this. The lawyer never showed up for my closing.
  2. bbauer

    bbauer Banned

    It is not even close to a validation
  3. ohnostuck

    ohnostuck Well-Known Member

    So, then? Do you have any advice? I sent the letter that asked for something bearing my signature blah blah blah..
  4. bbauer

    bbauer Banned

    If the letter did not specifically demand validation then I guess you will have to do it over and do it right. That's all I can tell you without knowing more.

    QUEEN_BEE Well-Known Member

    I, too, am confused as to what constitutes a legitmate and acceptable reply to a validation. I sent a validation letter to a CA, they send me a copy of the medical bill and health insurance claim form. Now what?

    Another CA that I send a validation letter to sent a letter stating that they bought the debt from XYZ Bank, stating the original creditor, subsequent creditor (which is the company that I actually had the cc with), the amount of the debt, type of account, date account opened, so on...But the ss# they list is not mine plus they screwed up my address. What should be my next step?
  6. bbauer

    bbauer Banned

    They didn't validate it. That's what. I got a large package in the mail today with a person's information in it. Among the things that was in the package was a letter which stated the following:"Based upon my review of the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act("FDCPA"), I believe we have provided you with adequate verification of the debt. and yada yada yada yada. Signed by some ignoramus Department Manager named Mickey. Guess what my answer may be in the event I bother to answer him at all.

    Dear Mickey:
    It is with great regret that I must inform you that it makes not one iota of difference what you believe. What you believe is totally and completely irrelevant and has no bearing whatever on the problems at hand. The only opinion that makes any difference whatever is what the courts have ruled. If you do not know what the courts have ruled then I just might have to take you to court and teach you what the courts have ruled.

    Unless, of course, you decide that you would rather just reach an amicable agreement to make amends for your having failed to meet the demands of the law.

    Mickey, the choice is clearly yours. Either make honest and reasonable offer for an amicable settlement in atonement for your multiple violations of law or I will immediately refer the matter to my attorney who will be quite happy to teach you what the courts have ruled.

    That is just about exactly how I would reply to the idiot.

    Send off a new wave of disputes to all 4 credit bureaus demanding they cure the problem. That's what all the credit repair companies do. (LOL}

    Seriously, The answer is obvious and simple. Just start with the last collection agency and demand validation.
  7. bbauer

    bbauer Banned

    Lest I be accused of not answering your question, please go to my website at and study that page. It will give you at least 3 links to what constitutes a proper and legal validation. I guarantee you that you are in for some rather heavy reading, especially by the time you get done with the decision in Spears v Brennan , but it is absolutely essential to read the case and the court's decision to thoroughly understand the issue of validation and what the courts have ruled. You can read the law until you are blue in the face, but until you have studied and understood how the courts have interpretated the law then you have no idea what the law says. It's what the courts rule that makes the whole of the law.
    Lacking the ruling of the courts, you cannot hope to understand the law. If no court has ruled on the law, then you are in net effect just flying blind.
  8. ohnostuck

    ohnostuck Well-Known Member

    Bill-After reading and reading and reading and reading I do not see anywhere on that website that tells me what is sufficient. The one short bit of info said "the information the collector already has about you is not sufficient" and the 3rd party collector must get the validation from the original collector snd then send it.
    I also see a lot of advertisements for your site, and things copied and pasted from other sites.

    Anyone other then Bill have info for me? I am not trying to be rude Bill, but I have wasted my time reading your VERY vague answers, and reading info from your site that I have seen your advertise here.
  9. Nave

    Nave Well-Known Member

    Try this thread Hm. Squawk1200 is an atty, and there is good information within the original post and all the responses.

    Now the $64,000 question..."What happened to Squawk?" Anyone heard from him?

    -Peace, Dave
  10. bbauer

    bbauer Banned

    Did you not click on the link that brought you to this page?
    If you did not get to that link then go there now and you will find the entire decision of the 7th circuit court of appeals in the case of Spears v. Brennan and it discusses very completely what the courts have ruled. And when you get done with reading one page you click on that page anywhere and you go to the next page in the rulings and decision of the court. It discusses validation very thoroughly.

    That's what you need.
  11. ohnostuck

    ohnostuck Well-Known Member

    Thanks Dave, I guess what they provided would be acceptable by law, however, I must add that law SUCKS :) I really owe nothing as the lawyer never provided the services, he has no info on me what so ever. He does't even know the date we closed. Why is this? Because the jerk never showed up. That's life I guess aye? PLLLLLLPPPPPP
  12. ohnostuck

    ohnostuck Well-Known Member

    Bill that is not the first link that you gave me, and after falling once again for this after the 2nd page I get BLANK pages with something that says creditwrench logo at the top. I tried it on both my computers only to see I fell for your crap again. I will learn I swear :)
  13. Nave

    Nave Well-Known Member

    I get the same thing Bill, until about page 5, then it are missing an image or 2...Also it is really tough to read one

    word on one


    then have to click

    on the next page

    to get the

    next three words

    Could you possibly summarize the multiple pages or maybe post a pointer to the final page that says: This is what is required for minimum proof of validation...1,2,3...etc?? Thanks.

    -Peace, Dave
  14. bbauer

    bbauer Banned

    I will check it all out and see what the heck is going on. I'm not doing it to lead you folks on and no, there isn't just one page that says it all.

    I'll check out the links and get it working right and then let you know.
  15. Hal

    Hal Well-Known Member

    I don't believe it is, and unless it was a copy of some sort of validation from the original creditor, neither does the FTC.

    The law doesn't really specify what is considered adequate validation - but I suspect if you were to file a suit the court would certainly consider the FTC opinion.
  16. bbauer

    bbauer Banned

    That's quite true, Hal. But it really does not make much difference that the law specifies or does not specify. It matters not one whit what the law says, but rather how the courts have ruled on what the law says. It only matters what the law says if no court has ruled on what the law says.
    To some extent, yes, especially lacking knowledge of such cases as the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals rulings on the matter in Spears v Brennan, March 2001. Now that a higher court has ruled on the law, that should become the definitive decision not what the FTC has to say in a non-binding opinion letter. Since the courts cannot be relied upon to defend the rights of the consumer since that isn't their job unless called upon to rule on an issue or other, it's up to the pro se litigant or a qualified legal counsel working for his client to present the opinions of higher courts in their briefs and motions as well as in courtroom arguments. Such persons need to present their arguments in writing and then back it up with court decisions that show the present court how other courts have ruled in the past. That way the trier of the facts and issues has prior knowledge and understanding of how plaintiff, defendant expect that the present court should rule.

    If one has to go to court, then one should prepare his case using that format. Argument first then case cites to back up what his point is.

Share This Page