Does this statement in a letter to CA have the same effect as a Cease & Desist? "You must now terminate this collection action and correct any erroneous reports of this debt" It is part of the Estoppel letter. The CA sent validation , what they consider validation and the mini miranda with "your balance is blah blah , please remit in full in the text of the letter. (although completely wrong/my name is not on the document anywhere nor is my SSN) Is this an actionable violation? Thanks, 3 day
It is a debt 3 months from SOL for a medical bill that the hopital billed the wrong insurance company for. I sent Validation letter, 8/03, never heard from CA 1//04 sent Estoppel letter. Early in 2/04 I diputed with CRAs , there has never been any dispute notation on this account , ever since first validation letter in 8/03 2/04 received a letter from CA with a copy of a printout that does not have my name or SSN anywhere, only kids names and oldest daughters SSN and notation that INS denied coverage/payment. My kids have been covered by insurance since they were born with no lapse. It has mini-miranda and please remit balance in full for blah. The letter from CA is addressed in my daughters name. It seems if a CRA verifies the TL, they would be big fat liars as my name is nowhere on any of this supposed validation.
The biggest thing that we are able to gleam from Johnson v. MBNA; is how pathetically inadequite verification is on the face of most disputes. Only 2 out of 4 pieces of information allowed MBNA to verify that the account was Ms. Johnson's, even though it was her husband's... More than likely the CA has 2 of them; name and address. MBNA didn't have Ms. Johnson's SSN & DOB, and still verified that it was her account.
Actually all they have is the address, the name is not mine on the validation, and appears nowhere on the "validation". However, I was wondering in my intial post, what constitutes "Cease & Desist"? Does the verbage in the Estoppel letter suffice? Thanks! 3day
Sorry 3day, didn't see ya. There's a lot of stuff going on here. In the first place if the MP filed claim to the WRONG ins. co. the claim is NOT denied. A "denied" status presupposes they got it to the right damn insurer. It would be more accurate to put it in the "they screwed it up completely" status. You say kids have been ins. since the day they were born. I assume this is from work? And that the MP has an agreement to file directly on your behalf? Also - that they will accept whatever is paid by the insurer as full payment? I do believe it's time to call your ins. co. tomorrow and ask about these things, and whether or not the claim was ever filed. Milk em for as much info as you can get, and take notes. We need this info. to fight the CA. k? How much is this for? ???
If these are "We will file on your behalf" cases and then they don't do it, or don't do it right, it's a breach of contract case. They failed to deliver on the product which was promised at the time of the transaction. see?
Hi YA Butch! Nice to "see" you! I had the kids on their own policy for a while. Their dad became employed by an Employer for a large project, was given health insurance from another major carrier and the kids were covered under that policy for awhile, time pases, when we learned that the project was being scrapped and he was going to be layed off, we reinstated-or reapplied for- the policy for the kids with the former Health Insurance and they have been covered ever since. So Covered by Insurer 1 since born, Covered by Insurer 2 for about 11 months ish. Covered by Insurer 1 and still covered by same. They (Hosp)made a huge 6000.00 billing errror, billed Old Insurance which was on file, but they were given new coverage info at time (daughter had surgery) , the debt is one of the remnants for one of the specialty Docs (Anestheia) The 6000.00 debt went to collections, took forever to get resolved, and this debt is from the same incident, it is between $200-300.00, exact amount is unknown because of CA interest.
Butch,,hopefully you will give this a second look, or if anyone knows the answer to this, I would appreciate it. I would really like to know if I have this CA on some violations. I disputed 8/03 Never marked TL in dispute. Sent Estoppel 1/04 Sent validation, however as mentioned earlier, my name nor my SSN is on the paperwork, nor am I responsible for the debt. The CA is messing with me and adding the negative TL to the other 2 CRA's, probably because I am asking for validation. I would really like to sue these weenies (pardon my French) ~ Also in the Estoppel , I asked them to terminate collection of the debt. Does this have the same legal effect as a Cease and Desist and are they in violation of the FDCPA for sending the validation with a letter asking for payment in full and the mini-miranda? I know that the debt should go back to the hospital and I will work on that, but I would really like to have a valid suit against these guys and need to know if I have a leg to stand on. They are not nice people and hard to work with. Big surprise, huh? Thanks for all your help, I really appreciate it.
