Thanks for the information. Alright then, I understand. I'll keep going. Thanks for the better links, cap1sucks! According to both sites, the statute of limitations is up. I got all three credit reports this morning and... they're clean! I have a course of action now. I'll send a dispute and validation letter certified return receipt requested. That way I have legal stuff to back me up and at the same time, I think Afni can only contact me in writing when/if they send me info validating the debt. Do you think mailing the letters to the corporate office will make them hostile? Do you have suggestions on how to write the letters, exactly? I found some good sample letters here but I don't think they fit my particular case very well. Like Jam said, mentioning that I was eight at the time is important to work in there.
Who cares if they are hostile? You tried nice, and they didn't respond to nice. They deserve whatever bad news comes their way. They are at best incompetent, and also deceptive, acting in bad faith, and apparently already prepared to violate the law where they think they can get away with it. They have already made it clear they will only be happy when they get your money, whether you owe them or not. Some sample letters ask for everything including the kitchen sink. Basically, keep it simple and clear, one page, typically four paragraphs. Don't cite law, threaten, or go into a lot of unrelated details. This letter is as much for them to read and be legally obligated under FDCPA to act in certain ways, as it is for some state or federal regulatory agency or court judge to read later if they fail. This letter is a precursor to later actions you may choose to take. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ................................................ Your name ................................................ Address ................................................ City, etc. ................................................ Letter date Their name Address City, etc. Their name Second address City, etc. (if you are sending a second copy to corporate) Ref: Your dunning letter, attached, dated xx/xx/xx Say that you received their letter on xx/xx/xx (assuming you are within 30 days of that receipt date). Say in your letter that you dispute this debt in its entirety, and that this is not your account. Indicate that you contacted their agent, Ms. xxxx, by phone on xx/xx/xx, and that she laughed and agreed you could hardly have opened this account since you were eight at the time, but she still demanded payment. Say that you are requesting validation, as provided for in FDCPA. Indicate that it is inconvenient for them to contact you by phone, and that they should restrict all contact to U.S. Mail. Also request: the amount of the debt the name of the creditor to whom the debt is owed the name and address of the original creditor the original creditor's account number all customer identification information from the original creditor's records original customer billing address from original creditor's records date the account was originally opened date of last payment on the account copies of all applications and statements from the original creditor .......................................Type your name as signature, do not sign. At bottom of letter, note: "Enclosed: copy of your dunning letter dated xx/xx/xx". and: "Sent Certified: nnnn-nnnn-nnnn-nnnn-nnnn-nnnn". or whatever your certified tag number is. You can pick up a handful of Certified and Return Receipt green cards at the Post Office. Fill this in from the certified tag number for each letter going out (and make copies of each). Attach (staple) a copy of their own letter. Make copies of everything. Send Certified, Return Receipt Requested, to the address on the letter you got, and to their corporate offices. After you mail it out, staple your Certified receipts to your file copy, and file in its own folder, in a safe place, along with the original dunning letter, and your dated notes from your phone conversations.
Their response might be: 1) Move on to some other sucker 2) Send you junk validation, then continue to try to bluff and threaten you into paying. You can file postal inspector complaints for mail fraud, local DA complaints, state AG complaints, FTC complaints, sue on various grounds, etc. You will have the documents to back up your case. 3) Continue collection attempts without validation, trying to bluff and threaten you into paying. You have same options as (2). 4) Send you sufficient validation to indicate there actually was an account opened with your identity. You could still file id theft complaint, based solely on your age, either thru any local law enforcement, or directly thru FTC. You could then block further collection, or sue and file complaints if they don't stop. Or send a complete C&D, including in it that this account is clearly fraudulent since you were eight at the time. My guess, based on other consumer complaints, is that they don't provide (4), because it costs, will probably show the consumer owes nothing, and doesn't pay off. Their game appears to be to just send out a bunch of poorly skip-traced dunning letters while trying to convince the consumer the burden of proof is on them, and make money on the volume.
Statistics update: Ripoffreport.com shows the following new Afni complaint threads: 1-24-07: 8 (so far today) 1-23-07: 19 1-22-07: 21 1-21-07: 8 1-20-07: 4 Note that these levels are now rising to far above the already noted jump to 4 complaints per day, from the much earlier level of 2 complaints per month. Complaints are generally the same: Consumer received collection bill allegedly for old Verizon account they never had and don't owe. On further contact, typically they demand payment, or that consumer file id theft/fraud complaints.
Additional recent (2007) complaints: http://www.complaintsboard.com/complaints/afni-collections-c4415.html http://www.complaintsboard.com/complaints/scam-c4416.html http://www.complaintsboard.com/comp...d-punished-for-what-they-are-doing-c3894.html
And if this letter doesn't work; you can always send a civil complaint with the next one. Write up a good timeline with the copies of all of the correspondence, and your notes from the agents call.
Looks like the press is starting to get wind of this: http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/ripoff232445.htm Many current reports on ripoffreport.com indicate problems getting thru their phone system to reach a live person.
Revised game matrix: Their response might be: 1) Move on to some other sucker 2) Send you junk validation, then continue to try to bluff and threaten you into paying. You can file postal inspector complaints for mail fraud, local DA complaints, state AG complaints, FTC complaints, sue on various grounds, etc. You will have the documents to back up your case. 3) Continue collection attempts without validation, trying to bluff and threaten you into paying. You have same options as (2). 4) Send you sufficient validation to indicate there actually was an account opened with your identity. You could still file id theft complaint, based solely on your age, either thru any local law enforcement, or directly thru FTC. You could then block further collection, or sue and file complaints if they don't stop. Or send a complete C&D, including in it that this account is clearly fraudulent since you were eight at the time. (5) In response to your validation request, "helpfully" send, or claim to have sent, a "fraud packet" designed to discourage filing a fraud report, since you said it was not your account. Cover letter would include that unless you file all this, they will assume the debt is valid and you have to pay them. This is essentially the position immediately taken by the person you talked to on the phone, so you know they have already planned out all their paths, like any good con. If you actually obtained a police report, and sent it, they can still claim they never got it, it was not adequate, your identification is not adequate (don't you love sending your all your identity information to a scum outfit like this?), something was not notarized, you had to include copies of your rental lease from the time of the account (Yeah, you were eight. But you better have that lease agreement, or you owe them the money!), the dog ate it, ... My guess, based on other consumer complaints, is that they don't provide (4), because it costs, will probably show the consumer owes nothing, and doesn't pay off. Their game appears to be to just send out a bunch of poorly skip-traced dunning letters while trying to convince the consumer the burden of proof is on them, and make money on the volume. To the extent they are sending out multiple bills on the same account, or are sending bills to addresses based only on partial name matches, they know the odds are low that each consumer receiving such a bill is actually the debtor. In such circumstances, claims to a right to collect a debt with demands for money, made after any consumer claim to not owing the debt, are made in bad faith. Therefore, their use of the mail to demand money from consumers they already know probably do not owe it is "mail fraud", and if a consumer disputes and they insist the consumer file and send fraud complaints, their demand for identity information is made under false pretenses, hence "phishing". Any forwarding such identity information to others, such as with sale of the alleged debt to other CAs, would be "id theft". The above issues are most effectively dealt with by FTC, state AGs, Postal Inspector, etc, under the broader fraud statutes they can use.
Here is the Afni party line from one of their collection drones, apparently still a "true believer". The other victims picked him apart. The underlines are mine. Note that there is no mention of the burden of proof of a debt being on the debt collector, or of their obligation to respond to a validation request or cease collection as required by FDCPA. It is all about the consumer having to try to prove it is fraud. As you found, that is the option they are steering consumers to, presumably since any difficulties the consumer runs into then steer him toward their goal of "pay us", whether owed or not. If, after sending a timely validation request, they send their "VE" letter, whatever that is, stating that the bill is still owed, they will have violated FDCPA for continued collection without validation. As to "what is that going to hurt" the consumer, it wastes hours and hours of consumer and police time and effort, along with mailing and notarizing costs, and discloses consumer identification information to a party that has no legitimate reason to have it, on an old, small value bill that is in too many cases bogus, where they already know or should know, that it is bogus or due to negligent misidentification. They are shoving their responsibilities, as well as costs and risks, onto consumers and law enforcement, by using deception in their collection practices, violating FDCPA and engaging in unfair trade practices. The 30 minute waiting time is interesting. Why would a CA let paying "customers" wait 30 minutes? They would staff up to rake in the money, because it would pay. More likely, they are getting flooded with complaints, and those complaints are being channelled to limited "complaint specialists", who are a cost center, not a profit center. http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/ripoff232340.htm "Rebuttal Consumer Comment Submitted: 1/24/2007 7:14:00 AM Modified: 1/24/2007 7:47:21 AM What to do? Well don't you know that verizon wasn't always the name of the company and did you call in to the company to see what the date of the bill was? Instead of getting irrational why don't you get the cold hard facts from the company and see if it was a bill in your name at the time or if it was a fraudlant account. I mean the company is only doing it's job, regardless if it's a collections agency or not. It's not like they are the root to all evils here. The lines to the company are extremely busy and yes it will take some time to get through. The best time to reach them is in the middle of the day, that seems to be the time of the day when call volume is at it's least, but you'll still have atleast a 30 minute waite. But I can guarantee you waiting on the line to get the bill rectified is going to make alot more sense than getting onto a website and sharing your opinion about a bill you really don't know anything about, right? So my suggestion is to contact them and sure write the dispute letter within 30 days but if you don't provide documentation showing that it is not a valid bill the debt is validated within 30 days and a VE letter is sent out to you stating that the bill is still owed. I'm just giving you my good old knowledge as for I am a Collections specialist. they are more than willing to work on getting the matter taken care of but at the same time it does take the consumers cooperation as well. Joshua - Roanoke, Illinois U.S.A. " "Rebuttal Consumer Comment Submitted: 1/24/2007 12:32:53 PM Modified: 1/24/2007 1:06:42 PM bottom feeder? I agree with all of you and definatley would be upset if I were in your shoes. The simple fact is I am just trying to give some advice from our side of the wall. Yes I do work as a Collections Specialist but am I proud of that?? No not really but it pays the bills and gets me through college. As you should know I am a student getting a degree in business admin and accounting so collections definatley is not my career and isn't a preferd job by choice. I also do think that you do have the right to post whatever opinions you have wherever you deem fit that it needs to be posted. But at the same time, wouldn't you rather try to get to the bottom of this. You did recieve a collections notice and if you know that it isn't you. call the number and see if it was fraud. What is that going to hurt, seriously? If its fraud, go to the website, print out the affidavit form and send it in, where it will be investigated. And as for my personal information. Really does that have anything to do with this at all? You can't just post someone's personal information on the website without their consent. Joshua - Roanoke, Illinois U.S.A. "
Filing motion to vacate because of incorrect geographical jurisdiction is a very weak position. Even in cases where the defendant knows about geographical jurisdiction and files motion to dismiss for that reason most courts won't dismiss. All they do is transfer the case to the proper court and the band plays on. Challenging improper service is also difficult to nearly impossible because summons is served by an officer of the court who swears he served properly. It can be done on rare occasions but one must have proof that the service could not possibly have taken place. An example of how tough it can be is the case of Donald J. whom I know personally and who lived in Kentucky but moved to California. He found out somehow that he was being served with a summons and called the sheriff's office in Kentucky and told them he had moved to California some 6 months ago and would they please mail him the summons. They did so and he filed motion to dismiss for lack of geographical jurisdiction. The court refused to dismiss claiming that he had been served in Kentucky by a Kentucky Deputy Sheriff. Donald then had to refile his motion to dismiss with a full explanation of how he had been served accompanied by a letter from the sheriff who had served him. I haven't heard the outcome of that as of yet. As I said earlier, under all normal circumstances I would strongly advise against using a C&D but this is a perfect fit for it for the simple reason that she would only have to give them a few days in which to respond and if they failed to do that she could sue immediately under FDCPA since it only allows for 5 days within which they must send her a letter informing her of what they intend to do. So if she didn't have such a letter in her hands within maybe 10 days at the very outside she could immediately file a federal case on them. She could put the problem behind her quickly that way and get it off her credit reports as well through the final settlement and most likely would never have to actually appear in any court. The majority of such cases are settled out of court by the parties. Her settlement could and should include removal from all records both public and private as well as her court costs, reasonable attorney fees and any other miscellaneous expenses. Why mess around when all she has to do is get out the bloody club.
I don't see what a full C&D buys you, if they are really willing to proceed to suit. Even though they can then only contact you to notify you what they will be doing, that can still include suing, reporting, selling the debt, or terminating further action, and nothing forces them to take such action now or notify you now, as opposed to just sitting on it and doing it later. In particular, I don't see any 5 day requirement for them to notify you what they intend to do, only that if they do contact you in the future, it must be for the allowed purposes. It forces nothing to any final conclusion, even if it might stop dunning calls and letters, and may still allow them to post even obsolete re-aged TLs with no liability until you catch them and dispute thru CRAs. In effect, the 90 day original date notification requirement can be used as a loophole thru which to snipe with even an illegitimate debt. In particular, it places no obligation on them to treat the debt as disputed, either in their (possibly re-aged) reporting to CRAs, or in their further sale to other CAs. If available, the timely (within 30 day of initial notice) dispute and validation request approach at least gives you a cause of action against ANY further collection activity. Furthermore, the dispute part means they must notify any other party that they notify of the debt that it is disputed, including any party they sell it to, who would then also have that obligation. You might then add a C&D after that, should they violate FDCPA by further collection attempts with no validation, to create additional violations indicative of harassment. Note that the C&D does NOT then remove their obligation to first provide validation before any further collection activity they might still be allowed to do under a C&D alone. Instead it places additional prohibitions against specific collection actions, namely, contacting to demand payment by phone or letter. http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fdcpa/fdcpact.htm#805 "§ 805. Communication in connection with debt collection [15 USC 1692c] ... (c) CEASING COMMUNICATION. If a consumer notifies a debt collector in writing that the consumer refuses to pay a debt or that the consumer wishes the debt collector to cease further communication with the consumer, the debt collector shall not communicate further with the consumer with respect to such debt, except -- (1) to advise the consumer that the debt collector's further efforts are being terminated; (2) to notify the consumer that the debt collector or creditor may invoke specified remedies which are ordinarily invoked by such debt collector or creditor; or (3) where applicable, to notify the consumer that the debt collector or creditor intends to invoke a specified remedy. "
Thank you all. Ontrack, I'll do everything just as you said and mail the letters tomorrow. Afni has a very long record of breaking laws and being manipulative and dishonest. So many people are filing complaints and lawsuits against Afni that you'd think someone important would notice and shut them down once and for all. Why doesn't someone do that?
Get your dispute and validation request letters in the mail, sent CRRR. you can check on the post office web site to see when they are received, by punching in the certified numbers. Be sure to print out these confirmations, as they show when the post office attempted to deliver. The green cards will confirm actual delivery, but sometimes they don't come back. You can then request delivery confirmation from the Post Office. Some CAs have been known to reject delivery of CRRR letters, in an attempt to divert consumers from enforcing their legal rights. If they actually fail to accept and sign for them, for 30 days, the Post Office will send it back to you as refused. Keep it unopened as evidence that they should have known you sent it.
There are two "end games" here, both in terms of how you will likely have to finish off their harassment of you, and in terms of Afni's on-going behavior. Your actions so far have been aimed at preserving your legal rights should you need to use them. Based on the rapid rise in complaints, Afni may be creating their own "perfect storm". That will not happen as long as they are successful in their tactic of directing consumers down the path of generating spurious consumer "fraud" complaints scattered over many jurisdictions across the country. This limits visibility to law enforcement at the national or state level, and extends the time they can keep playing this game before the pattern starts to become visible. Your situation can be very useful in this second game, since based on age alone, it is very clear to anyone you legally owe no debt, and that removes a layer of uncertainty in any assessment of whether Afni's actions are proper.
So far, FTC complaint just results in boilerplate reply: http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/ripoff232445.htm
At last, a Verizon customer service rep that can think for themselves! http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/ripoff231840.htm "Verizon Communications informed me I've been a victim of fraud and that other local customers have complained of receiving the same letters. Verizon's customer service rep thought this sounded like a "fishing" scam, in which real debts are intentionally mailed to the wrong people with the hope that those people will pay the debt just to protect their good credit. " Verizon was nailed (in Florida, among other states) for not doing enough to stop cramming by billing consolidators placing fraudulent transactions onto consumer phone bills. Even though they claimed they hadn't actually done the act, they had forwarded their bills with the fraudulent charges, the source of the fraudulent charges was not even one of the categories allowed to be consolidated onto phone bills, and Verizon failed to respond adequately when the volume of fraud should have brought it to their attention. They may have a consent agreement. They may have a similar legal dilemma here, since Afni also handles ASSIGNED accounts still owned by Verizon. If they are already routinely trading collection information, how credibly can Verizon deny knowledge of their partner Afni's activities? If you are in Florida, and handling a fraudulent bill from Afni, it might be worth a call to the Florida AG.
At what point does Verizon have a duty to its customers to protect them from the fraudulent acts of its collections partner, once it is aware of them? They are already being investigated in Florida over accepting fraudulent cramming charges. And at what point will Verizon act to protect its own namebrand and goodwill, presumably an asset of value to its stockholders, if another company (one of its outsourced customer service suppliers, at that) is dragging its name thru the mud? Note that these bogus bills are going out as alleged "Verizon" debts, even though they probably originated as GTE accounts in the mid-90's, when the Verizon name didn't even exist. Furthermore, why is Afni so willing to put at risk its continuing business relationship with its client, Verizon? Is OOS debt collection so lucrative that it is worth jeopardizing its customer service call center business?
So far so good! I followed your instructions and mailed the letters off today. One to the collection agency and one to their corporate office, both CRRR. I'll post an update as soon as something happens.
Here is a case similar to yours. Parents receive a collection letter from Afni on a bogus 10 year old Verizon account, opened when the son would have been 9 years old. They filed a complaint with MI AG. This does not look like the 9 year old opened any account, nor does it look like the parents opened anything in his name (they filed an AG fraud complaint). Id theft looks unlikely, since at 9 years old, the obtainability of the kid's information to use for that purpose would have been limited, and he would not have had any credit file to use for purposes of approving an account. Instead, like you, it appears that Afni is just matching up a name, or maybe even just an address that later was linked to that name, taking no responsibility for the errors that result. What appears to be happening is that on turning 19, and probably starting to apply for credit, this person (the son) now starts to appear in credit and other databases, possibly with connections thru direct marketing databases (or maybe ChoicePoint?) to the old address. They are now "matched" with the account, using the sloppy Afni matching, where even a year or so ago, they would not be visible in any credit files. They are dunned because they can be, because the credit files show a current address (the parent's address), not because they are an accurate identification of the "debtor" from the original Verizon (or GTE) records. http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/ripoff229466.htm "Submitted: 1/8/2007 11:42:51 PM Modified: 1/10/2007 10:33:32 PM Afni Collections - Verizon Ripoff, Totally messing with sons credit Bloomington Illinois *Consumer Suggestion ..Jodie, STAY OFF THE PHONE!! Company Afni Collections - Verizon Address: Po Box 3427 Bloomington Illinois 61702 U.S.A. Phone Number: 866-308-1160 Fax: Today in the mail i received a letter for the first time from afni stating they were trying to collect a debt that was owed by my son for the amount of $1257.79 for phone bill thru verizon. I tried for several hours to contact afni and all i received was a busy signal, so i called verizon communications to see what was going on and if i could get a better understanding at to what this was all about. I was informed from verizon that there was phone service at a previous address that we lived and there was a bill for $1257.70. I proceeded to tell her that there is no way there was a bill in my sons name at that address he was only 9 yrs old at the time. I was told i needed to get ahold of afni to discuss this account further because verizon sold the account to them so they couldn't help with anything more. My son who has lived in michigan for 10 yrs now and was 9 yrs old when living in Ohio did not authorize anyone to open a phone account in his name and how would this be possible? Is it not standard to use a social security number to be able to open an account and wouldn't they be able to find out this number belonged to a child? But here he is 19 starting his college career trying to get fiancial assistance and has this on his credit report or assuming it is there i will further check into that as well to see if it is on his report yet, that may cause him to be denied for a loan to help pay his college and that isn't fair to him to deal with. I am going to continue to call daily if i have to sit and hit redial over and over again until i can reach someone to help him with getting this taken off his credit report. Jodie marshall, Michigan U.S.A. "
