So here it is: I have a collection with Unique National Collections for the dreaded library thing. My problem is that they are saying I owe $193. which is insane. I sent them a validation. They sent me a computer print out from the library with a list of books I allegedly took out and never returned and a computer screen snapshot of the library account with my name address and email. I sent them a follow-up letter stating that this was not sufficient validation and did not meet the threshold of proof that I personally incurred this debt. They never replied but they did mark the account in dispute. I let it rest for a while then disputed with equifax. They verified the account as accurate. So, I sent them my own version of the estoppel intent to sue combo. The gist of my lawsuit is that they failed to provide validation and they verified with equifax that the account was in fact accurate when it was being disputed by me for accuracy and they had provided no proof. My point being that this constitutes further collection activity. Am I on secure ground with this? Also is this one or two violations? Guys please help I'm a nervouse wreck. Basically I gave them to until August 28, 2002 to delete or I file the next business day.
Can anyone help me on this? I just want to make sure that I am on the right page and won't be made to look like an idiot at the last moment. Can someone anyone give this a gander and point out any obvious errors if there are any.
Robin, Not seeing your actual documents this company sent to you claiming they validated I really can't say for sure if they did. If the documents came from the library and appear to be accurate with the dates the books were taken and not returned then, Yes I would consider this validation. Did you ever sign anything with the library? They did the right thing by placing the account as "in dispute" but as you claimed they verified this debt with the CRA while you still believe it as being not validated. I hate to be the bearer of bad news and of course this is only my opinion but here it is.... The collection company when asked by you supplied you with validation, remember there is no deadline they need to validate! They provided with what they believe is reasonable and adequate validation as written by the FDCPA 809 Validation of debts. They listed the account as "In Dispute" as required by the FDCPA and FCRA. They only verified with the credit bureau because they had a reasonable belief under the FDCPA that they have provided you with proof of the debt. Yes, you can bring the FTC opinion letters to court but remember they are only OPINION LETTERS and their opinion although it does mean alot is not written that way in law. The judge would have to decide then if proper validation was met. The judge would have to decide if they continued collection efforts if the judge doesn't think their validation is enough. Remember there is nothing that I can see that clearly states continued collection activity as it is written in the FTC Opinion letter. The judge will take it into consideration but I have found they put more merit on the actual wording of the law itself. In my opinion I don't think you have a case. The collection agency took and acted reasonably and not negligently or willfully to try and prove and collect on this debt. You will have to prove overwhelmingly that they purposely ment to break the law. The FDCPA gives a CA an affirmitive defense for unwillful acts and that they followed reasonable procedures to comply with the law. I think they might be able to prove it. Again, I hate to sound negative and I am on your side but from what you've stated I don't think you will win. You can of course file your suit to apply pressure on them to maybe make them cave in. If they don't you always have the option of dropping the suit. You can always file your suit because you believe that they did break the law and certian requirements were not met. You have that right to let a judge decide. Sorry. I wish you luck. Tac
How did they come up with the $193.00? seems like they failed to validate to me, if all you got was a computer po. What did the library pay for the books, and what is the depreciation on them at the time you allegedly made off with them. What was the FMV of the books when you allegedly stole them? Did you ever return them? Do you still have the books? Can you return them now? Is the $193 the cost of the books, or is it racked up late return fees? They obviously, will not have to provide you with a signed contract or note, since libraries do not typically make patrons sign contracts or notes to check out books. Courts do not always require a signed contract to validate the debt either, as some merchant transaction never have a signed contract to back up the transaction. There should be some sort of agreement associated with the issuance of your library card which outlines the late returned book fee structure. They should have sent this to you and shown how late fees were assessed.
Thank you tac. At least you replied. However, I want to point out that (a) the collection agency understood that this was not adequate proof because I wrote them another letter stating that this was not adequate proof along with the Wollman letter. Second, they never responded to my request for full validation. Third, why should I accept this as validation, simply because the library says it is. Where is the signed library card application, who is to say someone else didn't get a hold of my card and take out these books? Basically, where is the proof that I personally incurred this debt? Also, if the collection agency felt that they could verify this account as accurate because according to them they had verified the debt then what is the purpose of having the account marked "in dispute". Tac thanks for your opinion and for taking the time to answer, but I think that validation places the burden of proof on them not me and if you can maintain that a computer printout is justified validation with the library then why is it not justified validation for every other type of account?
I think you need to be careful, since this is a library, a public service operated by the local jurisdiction at no cost to the public, the judge will be very sympathetic to them. If you come across looking like a thief who stole books from the "children of the town" and now refuse to return them, or pay the library for them, you're going to get nailed. If you never checked the books out, fine - fight it. But if you checked the books out and never returned them, you may have to perjure yourself. Rest assured that if you are going to small claims court, the judge is going to want to know if you checked out the books, and why you didn't return them.
"FAIR MARKET VALUE"...maybe the book was 10+ years old...value $2.00??? Can you buy it at a USED BOOK STORE...ON-LINE...or by MAIL ORDER??? at a substantial reduced cost???
I think perhaps everyone is missing the point of validation here. Or perhaps when you validate you are already aware of the issue at hand. However for me, I had left the state I was living in for over five years, then I returned. I was here for about a year or so, when I ordered my credit report and saw the listing Unique National Collections and the amount of the alleged debt. I sent a validation because I didn't have the faintest idea what the h*ll they were talking about. I thought that was the reason people validate. They sent me back the computer print out of this list of books I was supposed to have taken out and a computer page snapshot of my name and address and email. I do not deny having an account at the library for several years so having that information means nothing to me. However, I do think that I would remember taking out something like 6 books. They also assert in their so-called validation that it is my responsibility to notify them if the card was lost or stolen. Well, since I never received any notice of this alleged debt until I saw it on my credit report, I never thought to check for my library card as I do not use it regularly. And at this time I have no idea where the card is. One thing is for certain, I would never knowingly take anything from anywhere without returning it. I just don't have these books. I can and would pay the fine but since they did not give me the courtesy of informing me before they put it on my credit report then I damn sure am not going to pay them for a debt that I question the validity of. It won't do anything to help my situation to do that.
As long as you are willing to testify that you never checked the books out in the first place, I say go for it. You have a clear case of stolen identity, and the validation was completely inadequate to prove you were the one who checked out the books. It would even be better if you can prove that the books were checked out after you moved.
Robin, Several years ago, our local library took something like 50 people to small claims court. The judge accepted a statement from the librarian that the records were correct and ruled against everyone of the defendants.
Keepmine: Where do you live? Also, I am not taking the library to court with that kind of prejudice I wouldn't stand a chance. I am however thinking of taking the collection agency to court. What I'm thinking is that I have nothing to lose and they might delete. Because the alleged debt is $193 of which they eill most likely only get a commission because it has been assigned not sold. They may not be willing to take the chance however small it may be that I can win on even one violation with an amount so small at stake.
P.S. if you never had knowledge that your card was lost or stolen how were you supposed to notify the library. I rarely check my wallet to make sure my library card is intact...lol Maybe you should go ahead and notify the Library now that you do not have your card and you suspect someone else is using it fraudulently. This will begin to build documentation to present in court to back up your stolen identity case.
LKH: Unfortunately I don't have the print-out that they sent me with me at the moment but I will take a closer look. It never really occured to me to pay it much attention because I am 99% sure I didn't take the books out. What I think is really unfair though is that with credit cards you have to protections built in if someone makes charges that are not yours. First you will know by the next billing cycle at the latest. Second you are only liable for up to $50. no matter how much they run up. With our nice little harmless library no one ever notifies you of anything until you see this on your credit report and then they want you to pay some exorbitant fee with no solid proof it belongs to you and according to some of the stories I've heard on this board they still won't delete after its paid. So if that is the case they will never ever get a dime out of me. If I thought I could pay to get this out of my hair I would. The amount is hardly a hardship, however, I refuse to pay a debt that I am almost certain is not mine at least I did not legally incur it and then get no deletion and have to wait seven years for it to come off. That may be the only downside to going to court, I may get a judge that is sympathetic to this collection agency simply because they are collecting on behalf of the library and I may be ordered to pay without any guarantee of deletion. If that's the case I will be forced to pay because then that might result in a judgement on my credit report.
If you were out of state when this happend, and you can prove it with an old bill of some sort that has your out of state address on it, I think you can then prove to them that it isn't yours and you obviously were a victim of ID theft in this case and they need to fix it.
"WITH-OUT ASSUMING RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE 'ALLEGED' DEBT...I offer this $10.00 for you to go away and remove all the accounts you put on my credit reports, and NEVER contact me again"
I say file now. If you were out of town and couldn't have possibly checked the books out, then they have to prove that it was you. They have to prove it was you anyway. Make sure that you have all of your ducks in a row and file now. Perhaps when they are served they will wake up and smell the coffee. Some people actually send you a letter asking for $193 and expect you to hand it over, no questions asked. Imagine how many people do just that. When will they learn?
Some people actually send you a letter asking for $193 and expect you to hand it over, no questions asked. Imagine how many people do just that. When will they learn? ttowns ------------------------------ That's the name of the game. Sucks don't It!?
