Starting new thread; wanting some answers from some experts or people who have filed suit. Okay, I sat down and read the FDCPA again today, and it reads as follows... (b) Disputed debts If the consumer notifies the debt collector in writing within the thirty-day period described in subsection (a) of this section that the debt, or any portion thereof, is disputed, or that the consumer requests the name and address of the original creditor, the debt collector shall cease collection of the debt, or any disputed portion thereof, until the debt collector obtains verification of the debt or a copy of a judgment, or the name and address of the original creditor, and a copy of such verification or judgment, or name and address of the original creditor, is mailed to the consumer by the debt collector. So it looks as though they did send me the name and address of the original creditor. Is this all they are obliged to do? I am confused, I always thought that validation was supposed to be sent by the CA, but it looks like they can flip it back to the original creditor? Or am I reading this wrong? Can they (CA) just send the letter with the name and number of the original creditor and say that's it, that's our validation and take it from there? If so, that sucks.
sometimes state fdcpas are tighter than the federal. ty researching your state laws to see if there is any clarification. Example: federal fcra only covers 3rd party debt collectors...tx fdcpa covers oc's too. you may get some more validation info by looking up state laws...not only that, but if the ca is outside your state, many times, they are not knowledgeable about YOUR state laws. (i.e. I just verified that 2 of the 3 collections on my cra were pursued my agencies not bonded in my state. Already paid them, so will use as leverage for deletion. Might work, might not)
Requesting validation and asking for the name and address of the creditor are two separate things. What did you ask for in your dispute letter?
Same old basic validation letter; This second communication is being sent to you in response to the copy of the enclosed letter to me, dated February 28, 2003. I have already requested validation by fax, however, since that date I have waited an appropriate amount of time, (5 working days), have pulled my credit report and note that there is still an entry on my credit report regarding the alleged debt. Therefore I am in writing, sent return receipt requested, asking again that you validate this alleged item. Be advised that this is not a refusal to pay, but a notice sent pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 USC 1692g Sec. 809 (b) that your claim is disputed and validation is requested. May I remind you that pursuant to the FDCPA, Sec. 809 Validation of debts [15 USC 1692g], that until validation of these debts is obtained, â??the debt collector shall cease collection of the debt, or any disputed portion thereof, until the debt collector obtains verification of the debt or any copy of a judgment, or the name and address of the original creditor, and a copy of such verification or judgment, or name and address of the original creditor, is mailed to the consumer by the debt collector.â? At this time I will inform you that if your offices continue to report invalidated information to any of the 3 major Credit Bureauâ??s (Equifax, Experian or TransUnion) this action may be interpreted as collection activity. Due to this fact, if any negative mark is found on any of my credit reports by your company or the company that you represent I will not hesitate in bringing legal action against you and your client for the following: · Violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act · Violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act I respectfully request that your offices provide me with competent evidence that I have any legal obligation to pay you. If your offices are able to provide the proper documentation as requested in the following declaration, I will require at least 30 days to investigate this information and during such time any collection activities must cease and desist, including placing any information regarding the alleged debt into any repository of any credit reporting agency. I would also like to request again, in writing, that no telephone contact be made by your offices to my home or to my place of employment. All future communications with me MUST be done in writing and sent to the address noted in this letter
4*What Is Validation? *********** Butch http://consumers.creditnet.com/stra...ad.php?s=&threadid=42188&highlight=validation
Brown, I must ask you what is the nexus between consumer law and commercial law that would allow us to use that which is consumer law and that which is strictly consumer law all in the same breath so to speak? To help you understand my question I refer you to And then we run into the following bit. We see in a great many cases such as Skenk v. Transworld Systems Inc. that the courts are very specific and careful to be certain that FDCPA and UCC are not interchangeably used or referred to. They go to great pains to rule that a case must be either consumer law or commerical law and cannot be intermixed like a bowl of fruit salad. So how is it that we can do so without causing confusion or mistaken application and erroneous thinking? Another question. How is it that we can imagine that such a commonly known and understood concept as validation has never been adjucated in a court of law when just about everything else one can possibly imagine has been ruled upon so many times that it often becomes almost ridiculum? What would lead you to believe that no court has ever ruled on the issue of what does or does not constitute proper validation? This is very confusing to me and I do hope you might be able to come up with the answers to my question since you were the one who provided the referenced authority. Help me out here, please.
