I became ill, lost my job, continued to pay my bills until my savings ran out in 2002. In 2005, a CA sued for two accounts (Chase and Discover). After several continuances over about a year, to give them the opportunity to come up with the validation I asked for (thanks to reading these boards) - I moved to another state and they nonsuited the cases in 2006. In March 2007, I received a letter from the same CA asking me to contact them in their attempt to collect again on the Discover account. I sent a DV letter CRRR to the CA on the Discover account. Then I received a form from what was once part of the same CA, but listed with a different name (I read somewhere that the new CA had been sold) showing a copy of the Discover account last statement date 11/02 and a ? bill from the new CA with their due date of 5/04. This is not what I asked for using one of the sample letters from this board. On the Chase account I received a letter dated 3/22/07 giving me â??a further opportunity to pay this account.â? Next, I received a letter, dated 3/23/07, stating that the account had been sold to the above â??newâ? CA. I thought from reading the state laws on the net that the SOL is 3 years in the state of origin of the debt, but a lawyer in that state told me it was five years for credit cards. Well, the five years are almost up - next fall/winter. What I am wondering is first how to answer the â??not what I asked for Discover validation,â? and should I send a DV right away to the new Chase owner or wait until they contact me? What are they gaining from passing these around to different branches of the same company?
It depends on what sample letter you used. If the dispute only requested statements, contract, terms, application, etc. Chances are that the validation request is viable. Some of the sample letters request everything including the kitchen sink, which are not germane to resolving the issues that validation is to attempt to resolve.
Goin' round and round with the CAs This is what I sent them along with the attached "fill in the blanks" requesting date acquired, etc. and the names of the credit bureaus that they reported the account. "Please attach copies of: Agreement with your client that grants you the authority to collect on this alleged debt, or proof of acquisition by purchase or assignment. Agreement that bears the signature of the alleged debtor wherein he or she agreed to pay the creditor." From recent reading here, I see that it would have been easier to make it shorter and sweeter, without the attached form. But time passes - live and learn.
The 'fill in the blanks' part is the one which throws it into the class of DV which is covered by the ACA 'what isn't validation' article. Basically, as long as te requested information goes to (1) determining whether the consumer is the right consumer and (2) that the amount of the debt is correct, without unauthorized fees; it falls within 'what is validation' per the FTC; which you could defend yourself against the CA, if need be.
Are all of these account showing up on all of your reports? Have you done basic disputes with the CRA's for all of them? SOL for a CC is the open category of accounts, so look here for your state: http://whychat.5u.com/States/states.html You also have to be asking if your state requires a CA to be licensed and bonded. If your state does require that, and the CA/attorney is from out of state, a wise DV letter writer often includes details about state law as a means of discouraging an out of state debt collector from attempting to collect a debt. Sure, they can " get legal " if they want, but most of them would prefer to simply drop your account if it seems unlikely they can collect. Debt collection is mostly about economic gain for the industry, of course, so if they think their time is better spent elsewhere, they can choose to stop contacting you.
That was going to be my next list of questions - I have printed out two of the CRAs - TransUnion wouldn't let me - have to call. Equifax is an awful mess - addresses 40+ years old, Asset Acceptance on the same accounts as Factoring Company, etc. Also looks like accounts are duplicates. Can't get it all straight in my head, yet. Some dates are wrong on Experian, but mostly it looks OK. If the SOL is 3 years for Va.(on WhyChat) then it almost looks like they brought that suit after the SOL. But I'm still confused as to whether it is the state I'm living in now, or Va. which is the state of origin of the debt? As far as licensed and bonded - it seems that they just ship it off to a lawyer in whatever state and they would assume the licensing and bonding part of it all?? Anyway, they show a regional office in this state on their letterhead. I understand that I should have included that "licensed and bonded" part in the DV letter. I guess I could just send another and include that since they didn't send me what I asked for anyway??
Well, they might ship it off to another lawyer, but remember that costs them money. This is all about money, and if they perceive there is a high probability will gain from paying an attorney in another state to collect the debt they might pay that attorney. Most likely they will send some form of communication back to you and you can include the license and bonding requirements in your response. We call it DV round #2.
Since you moved to another state, the current state you reside in will be the SOL that they will use to sue you. I.E. if you move from TX which has a 4 year SOL, to OH which has a 15 SOL, they will use OH SOL for suit.
You mentioned Why Chat's site, so you might go back there and look for the sample SOL letter if you find it appropriate to send.
