Hello: I disputed a CA TL with Transunion and the account is currently in dispute status. The TL is marked "Account disputed by consumer." Today I received a letter from the collection agency that says, "We have been informed you are applying for credit, the above balance is on your credit file as an unpaid account. Remit payment in full today to clear your credit record." Is this against the rules to attempt to collect while it's being disputed with CRA? I have also just sent this CA an estoppel letter because they have not properly validated this debt. What should my next step be? This is the last (I hope) negative TL on my credit report and I am feeling really discouraged about it....this CA is sure persistent!
1*Today I received a letter from the collection agency that says, "We have been informed you are applying for credit, the above balance is on your credit file as an unpaid account. Remit payment in full today to clear your credit record." 2* What should my next step be? lisae1 ================================= 1*This is a 1000 buck violation make them eat the debt. 2*ITS 15 days after they get your estoppel. >------------>> LB59 ]
Would you mind telling me the best way to go about pursuing this situation? Is there a sample letter somewhere? Do I report this to FTC or who? Has anyone on this board ever received $1000 for a violation by a collection agency??? thanks for you input and help.
If they are under a validation letter, and not just a dispute from the CRA, then it is a violation for continued collection activities. Where it gets tricky is where they 'validate' (according to their definition of validate), but not according to ours. When we tell them there is something wrong with their validation, in most cases, they believe that they complied with 809 completely, so they are not bound by the 809(b) cease of collection activities any longer. Chances are you will need to have a concrete reason as to why you don't believe that the CA's validation is incomplete or inaccurate when you persue them on the 809(b) violation.
You're right, that is the situation, I'm seeking validation and disputing with the TransUnion. Immediately upon sending a second validation letter, I received "verification of debt" which was just a computer-generated printout of an old utility bill. From this board, I have learned that that is not validation, that it is hardly verification. Since then, I have sent them an estoppel letter, reiterating that I have asked for validation.... Another thing I want to add is that this collection is for an old phone bill. The phone number listed on the account now shows a new area code, it's not the area code for that area when I lived there. Is this a significant inaccuracy? Or, since this collection agency is so persistant, should I just suck it up and pay them? thanks for your help.
Did you request validation from the CA? If you didn't request validation from the CA, and disputed the TL with the CRA, the letter from the CA is not a violation. You never requested validation from them, therefor they can not be in violation of 809(b) The violation will be in your hands soon enough. If the CA does not get back to TU affirming that it is your debt and TU continues to show it, after 30 days, even with the notation of "Disputed by Consumer" TU could be found in violation. It probably won't be $1,000, but you should be able to (if the 30 days were passed) call a rep at TU and say that you disputed an incorrect account on your report XXX days ago and haven't gotten the response from them. 90% chance they will either delete (you win) or "validate". They can't legally try and validate it with the CA, get a response that you've disputed it, and technically keep it on your report indefinitly. "That isn't my account, and XYZ company has admitted to you that they agree that it probably isn't my account. So how can you keep it on my report?" You may want to get a validation request out to the CA and wait for the green card before you call up TU so that the CA can "validate" to TU, giving you an easy $1,000 violation. Just my $.0000001 ChrisB
I did request validation from the CA. When I received the green card back from the 1st validation letter, I disputed it with Transunion. The status asd of right now is that they should be receiving an estoppel letter any moment as I sent it out this week. So, is the fact that they sent me a demand for payment a violation or not? The dispute with Transunion will reach 30 days next week. Like I said in my prior post, I received a computer print-out of the old phone bill (modified though, with a new area code listed on the bill) as "verification." I am insisting with the CA that this is not proper validation, they are insisting that it is proper validation. This CA did verify the debt as mine (they did delete one TL because they had the same debt listed twice on my credit reports) with experian so I am thinking they'll probably verify with Transunion as well. Should I just pay this thing off? They are certaining fighting to keep it on my credit report. thanks.
I did request validation from the CA. When I received the green card back from the 1st validation letter, I disputed it with Transunion. The status asd of right now is that they should be receiving an estoppel letter any moment as I sent it out this week. So, is the fact that they sent me a demand for payment a violation or not? The dispute with Transunion will reach 30 days next week. Like I said in my prior post, I received a computer print-out of the old phone bill (modified though, with a new area code listed on the bill) as "verification." I am insisting with the CA that this is not proper validation, they are insisting that it is proper validation. This CA did verify the debt as mine (they did delete one TL because they had the same debt listed twice on my credit reports) with experian so I am thinking they'll probably verify with Transunion as well. Should I just pay this thing off? They are certaining fighting to keep it on my credit report. thanks.
Is TransUnion the only credit report that it is showing up on? If yes, and the dispute is really, really, really close (within 25-30 days) of the date after receipt, then chances are the DF didn't reply to their verification request. TransUnion usually waits until the very last day of the deadline if the DF doesn't respond. I tend to receive a lot of the result reports on the eve of the deadline + mailing...
Transunion is not the only report showing it. The collection agency originally was reporting it to experian and transunion. They had it listed on each report twice as a duplicate account. When I disputed with experian, they deleted one account because it was a duplicate, but it came back verified as mine on the other one (even though the DOLA is wrong and the area code of the bill is not the same as when I lived there). I didn't realize at that time that I had to dispute with both CRAs, that's why my dispute with transunion is happening after experian. Is the inaccurate area code of significance and how do I insist on proper validation if they are claiming the have "verified" with an old (modified) phone bill print out? thanks.
False & Misleading Representations 807 (10) "(10) The use of any false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect any debt or to obtain information concerning a consumer." Them providing a falsified statement is a false representation or deceptive means to collect, or attempt to collect a debt. You will need to have proof of when you first obtained the phone number that they are trying to list on the account 'invoices'. Chances are, when they 'skip-traced' to find your current information, they updated everything to match what they found out...
1*I have sent them an estoppel letter, reiterating that I have asked for validation.... I did request validation from the CA 2*So, is the fact that they sent me a demand for payment a violation or not? 3*Is the inaccurate area code of significance? 4*how do I insist on proper validation if they are claiming they have "verified" with an old (modified) phone bill print out? 5*since this collection agency is so persistent 6*should I just suck it up and pay them? lisae1 ================ 1*like i said in my other post above. 2*ITS 15 days after they get your estoppel. >------>> LB59 2*I told you it was in my post above.1*This is a 1000 buck violation make them eat the debt.>------->> LB59 3*Certainly 4*You don't have to educate them on what is or isn't' 5*They're all persistent, so do you want to pay them all? 6*Yeah I think ya otta reward em for breaking the law don't you.?Why not do your part to encourage the slime balls to keep preying on other victims? >---*----* ---*-->> LB[colo*r=red]59[/co*lor]
Re: Re: Re: CA violation 1*like i said in my other 2 post above. ITS 15 days after they get your estoppel. >------>> LB59
Re: Re: Re: CA violation 1*Where it gets tricky is where they 'validate' (according to their definition of validate), but not according to ours. 2*When we tell them there is something wrong with their validation, in most cases, they believe that they complied with 809 completely, so they are not bound by the 809(b) cease of collection activities any longer. 3*Chances are you will need to have a concrete reason as to why you believe that the CA's validation is incomplete or inaccurate when you peruse them on the 809(b) violation. jam237 | 1*Their definition don't count the laws does. If you keep the validation process on tract by not letting them derail it with their BS letters then there is nothing tricky about it. 2*Well then don't educate them but take advantage of their ignorance by taking the 2nd step in the Val. process. Heaven knows they have no qualms about taking advantage of the consumers ignorance. One way they try doing that is with their BS letters. 3*They don't have a concrete reason for their belief so why should you? >------------>> LB59
