I received a letter today from a attorney, this letter is form a CA that did not validate. I want to respond to the attorney by tomorrow hence the emergency part. I sent the CA three letters, and have them on several violations. Violation one - They failed to validate and continued to report to the CRA. Violation two - They never notified to the CRA of my dispute. Violation three - After I sent them stopel they sent me a dumb letter telling me that they where not violating laws etc. However I beleive this is a cease and desist violation right? Violation four - three months after the request for violation they report my account as disputed on one CRA and not the others. The attorney basically denied that his client violated any laws and with his letter sent me a fax from that the original creditor sent them with a bill. I know this does not arises to the level of proper validation. finally the attorney asks me what I wouold consider a micable resolution. My question is the following, should I ask for some cash and removal in exchange for not filing a lawsuit or do you think they will not fork out any money and I should simply request they remove the TL? I am not greedy but this darn CRRR add up and a couple hundered at this point would be nice What do the experts recommend? Thanks
I think the best way to go would be to try to negotiate that the CA terminates all present and future collection activity, removes the TL's from your reports, and agrees not to sell or assign the alleged account to any other party in exchange for you not sueing.
Violation three - After I sent them estopel they sent me a dumb letter telling me that they where not violating laws etc. *However I beleive this is a cease and desist violation right? fxs158 ========== *Replying to your estoppel letter is not a cease and desist violation because an estoppel letter isn't a cease and desist letter.Understand? THE END ** *** ** LB 59
If you included with the validation letter a c&d letter, then it would be a c&d violation. Validation on its own doesn't confer a c&d, it does confer that the CA cease collection activities, but any letter not 'attempting to collect a debt' would be fair game. Now, the continued reporting would be a violation... But, its not a sueable FCRA violation unless you dispute it with the CRAs and they don't update it. If they verify the listing before sending the validation, again it would be a violation. The FTC gave them wiggle-room in allowing them to continue reporting a previously reported account in general as not being collection activity, but the act of VERIFYING the account is continued collection activity.
lbrown, I Included the cease and desist on the validation later. I just disputed the items with the CRA and the thirty days are up next week so maybe I should weit untill then to reply to the attorney letter? Thanks everyone for yor feedback, do the other violations listed look about right and at this point of the game is it better to settle or would it be a slam dunk in the court room and maybe I should consider suing them? Is there a lettter around that deals with this situation?
Even God's not a "slam dunk" in a court room FX. The 9th circuit just removed Him from our pledge of allegiance. However, the actual filing of the suit is where the leverage comes from. Usually it gets their attention and they want to settle out of court. That said, you only need ONE violation really. At this point what can the 2 of you agree to do to make this whole thing go away as painlessly as possible, for BOTH sides? Right now you want to contemplate an offer they won't refuse. .
Re: Re: Emergency Please help! It's the 9th Circus Court! For some reason my mind is on Ignorance and Want, from the Dickens tale, A Christmas Carol. What is this world coming to?
Reporting the TL to the CRA is considered a communication and according to FDCPA §809(a) the CA must send you a notice containing specific things - the amount of the debt, the name of the creditor to whom the debt is owed, and three statements. If you didn't get that notice in 5 days after the first time this TL was reported - this is a violation. Violation one - if they reported after you disputed without the notice of dispute, this is a violation. But, if, as you state in Violation four - they reported that your account is disputed, then this is not a violation. [color=0066FF]FCDPA § 807. False or misleading representations A debt collector may not use any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, [/color]the following conduct is a violation of this section[color=0066FF]: (8) Communicating or threatening to communicate to any person credit information which is known or which should be known to be false, including [/color]the failure to communicate that a disputed debt is disputed. [color=0066FF]FDCPA :: CASS Of course, [/color]if a dispute is received after a debt has been reported to a consumer reporting agency, the debt collector is obligated by Section 1692e(8) to inform the consumer reporting agency of the dispute[color=0066FF].[/color] Violation two is not a violation because of Violation four. Violation four - FDCPA does not set a time frame for reporting that a debt is disputed nor it obligates them to report to all three CRAs, so this is not a violation. Would you post the letter (without any personal info, of course)? So, from what I can see, you might have them on one or two violations, but you are not ready for the court yet. Wait until you see what happens with the CRA dispute. JMHO
