Half-A** Validation

Discussion in 'Credit Talk' started by molly, May 1, 2001.

  1. molly

    molly Well-Known Member

    What if you don't get what you ask for when you ask for validation? I asked for validation, no I didn't use the one posted here but I pretty much asked for the standard information. They didn't send me everything. What do I write to them now? DO I demand deletion? If so, how should I word that?
  2. godaddyo

    godaddyo Well-Known Member

    It seems to me that by asking for validation you are making the first move. If they arent replying there must be a reason. I have been sending my letters directly to the attorney for the company. Who cares if they dont respond, what if they sent proof? If they dont send proof this can strengthen your case to get them removed.

  3. NanaC

    NanaC Well-Known Member

    I think the question is here: What if you get "some" information in return and not all the information you asked for, right??

    I don't have an answer..but I didn't want the question to get lost. :)
  4. lbrown59

    lbrown59 Well-Known Member

    Incomplete Val.is the same as none: Treat it as such and act accordingly!
  5. AnnMarie

    AnnMarie Well-Known Member

    Great thread......I want to dispute an electric bill paid charge off. I went ahead and paid it, having read that all open collections/charge offs need to be paid for a mortgage. Since it was <$200.00 I felt it was worth it and thought it might be easier to get off my report once paid. I requested they send me billings, original agreement, etc the only sent me a print out of billings $, date and payment dates & amount.
    What do I have the right to ask for specifically in a dispute letter? I know there's many versions of such all over this board but does anyone have a good concise list or what I can legally demand?

  6. molly

    molly Well-Known Member

    I sent a second page similar to the one posted here. I was not worried about waking up the dogs bcause this one is paid. They half a** filled out the form and sent a letter saying that they haven't this loan in their system since 1998. Now are they implying that they're not reporting this loan? They completely filled out the form but did not write what they were supposed to. They just put stuff in to fill it out. No signatures, no statements.

    What is the next step, that is the question?
  7. bbauer

    bbauer Banned

    Several things come to mind here.
    What did your validation letter have in it? If the actual wording of the validation demand itself was more than one line long, then it was off the point, off the wall and out to lunch in my opinion. Again, in my opinion, the validation statement of demand has no need whatever to ramble off into subjects and topics that have nothing whatever to do with the actal validation process.

    The validation letter should never be more than one page long and one paragraph consisting of one line addresses the validation process, The second paragraph should address the timliness issue and raise concerns about the rights of the debtor making the demand and the third paragraph should address the "gag order" portions.

    That's all that is necessary. Anything else is completely and totally superfulous.

    There should never be a need to send a second validation letter for any reason whatsoever. Once the validation letter has been sent and recieved, one sits back and awaits the next move of the creditor or collection agency or his lack of movement, whichever and in either case starts the attack phase of the campaign without further ado.

    If the creditor or collection agency sends out another demand for payment, that signals the start of the attack phase. If they fail to do anything at all in a timely manner, that also signals the start of the attack phase.

    You simply take it from there, proceeding to the conclusion of the matter whatever that maybe, and it should be largely controlled by you, not them. Failure to properly control simply means you lose.

    Bill bauer
  8. AnnMarie

    AnnMarie Well-Known Member

    Uh, Bill....I do believe she said this matter she is requesting validation on is paid--therefore, it would not behoov her to sit back and wait for a letter demanding payment--for it will surely never arrive?
    I am in the same spot, and trust me, these people didn't bill me when the matter was not paid, I seriously doubt they're gonna bill me and demand payment now that it's been paid for quite some time.
    Or did I miss something?

  9. Nave

    Nave Well-Known Member

    Funny how they will continue to verify and harass though huh! Strong arm of the law!

  10. bbauer

    bbauer Banned

    Yes, I think something is missed here.
    Here demand for validation would be the same regardless of whether or not the bill was paid. What she wanted (whether or not she realized it) was a failure to meet her demand for validation in a timely manner (30 days plus 5 business days)
    as a max. Partial validation is as good as no validaton at all. During the time she was waiting for the validation, she should have also been demanding validation from the credit bureau which, if her validaton letter to the creditor or collection agency were properly worded would not have happened, i.e. the credit bureau would not have received an answer because of her properly worded gag order to the CA or creditor.

    Knowing in advance that the CA or creditor could not have answered the CRA, she then immediately demands proof of validation from the CRA. When (if) the CRA responds that the CA or creditor was the respondent, then she has reason to file complaints against the both of them, Her complaints should have been directed toward the BBB, the FTC and even to the AG in both states for violation of FCRA and FCDPA.

    All of this should have happened on a very tight time schedule. Complaints against the CRA to the BBB for failure to respond within 30 days. Same for the creditor or CA.
    Complaints to the BBB, FTC for violation of FDCPA against the creditor, CA. Again, 30 day rule. Then another round for the creditor, CA failure to even meet her demands for falidation.

    Now then, we know that the complaints to the FTC are of little actual value in terms of results, but it does help build a case file for their later use.

    We also know that complaints to the BBB is again unlikely to produce any positive results in terms of immediate satisfaction of demands although it sometimes does. But what is accomplaished is that although she loses the round, whe also wins the round and helps others at the same time. Here is how.

    The CRAs are quite proud of their record of prompt responses to the BBB. They want no public record of their atrocities. So they must answer those complaints because if they begin to ignore them, it will soon enough catch up with them and they will start to get bad reports out of the BBB and they don't want that. But suppose that everyone here reading these boards suddenly saw the light and started filing BBB complaints at every possible opportunity? Multiple reports of violations of FCRA and failure to respond in a timely manner and more? And multiply that by hundreds, maybe even thousands of complaints they suddenly have to answer? That's going to put a big hitch in their git-along and over time will tend to slow them down even more, thereby generating even more complaints. A very positive benefit to all.

    And then with the collection agencies and creditors. They don't want bad reputations with the BBB either, and it's going to look awfully bad if people check them out and find multiple complaints of attempting to collect sums of money not due or owed, multiple reports of violations of the FDCPA and FCRA, and then when we start to offensive phase of our efforts, we hit them with proof that they are a criminal organization and proveably guilty of extortion, and by assumptive inference thereby guilty of running an on-going criminal enterprise, probable violations of the Rico Act and heaven knows what else they may be inferrentially guilty and you have it as a matter of public record, you will have a pretty strong position.

    Do you think that a CA would want a judge to see a copy of their dismal record with the BBB??

    Pretty strong bargaining tool, I'd say.
    And only those of us who are victims of their "criminal enterprises" can build the record against them with out complaints. which they also must answer.

    What do you think?
    Bill Bauer
  11. CYA

    CYA Well-Known Member


    What is this "gag order" and why does it keep the CA from reporting to the CRA?

  12. godaddyo

    godaddyo Well-Known Member

    Dont we also want to keep disputing the item with the CRA over a 90 day period during this process. I would think that we would just keep the item in an investigative process in hopes that they will mess keep messing up or even better they might delete the item in question.

    "live long and prosper"
  13. molly

    molly Well-Known Member

    I did dispute it with all three CRA in the last thirty days. This company responded in 10 days. It hasn't even been thirty days since I wrote the validation letter. I will figure out my next move this weekend, thanks anyways.
  14. molly

    molly Well-Known Member

    I know exactly what I wanted and that was to remove it from all three of my reports BECAUSE they cannot verify the information they are reporting. Its plain and simple. They say that it hasn't been on their system since 1998, if so, then why and how can they report it to all three bureaus? I want them to admit (in an around about way because you know they will never come out and say it) that they can't verify it and are going to remove it. Is there a good letter specifically for that?
  15. godaddyo

    godaddyo Well-Known Member

    I think that it is very effective to keep the account in dispute. The 90 days builds a case and leaves a paper trail. If you are looking for these credit bureaus to admit that they cant verify information you are going to wait a long time, probably eternity. Even when you take them to court it seems to be all negotiations. They dont go on trial unless there is a FTC or class action law suit in the works. We can battle them all we want, but what a lot of it really seems to boil down to is you personally. You want them to take it off period. That is what would make you happy isnt it? I realize that their head on a silver platter would also be nice now, wouldnt it?

  16. godaddyo

    godaddyo Well-Known Member

    You dont have to wait 20 more days just because they verified it in ten. The item can be reinvestigated by law immediately after the verification. I think this might be what you are thinking, Please correct me if Im wrong.

  17. molly

    molly Well-Known Member

    Well, I am going to send another letter to the company and another dispute this week. And then when the write back again with a lame letter (the company) I am going to send another and another. Then I will start calling, I will call every week until I get it removed. In the meantime, I am seeking other advice from different agencies. I will keep on them too until i get it removed. I realize this will not happen overnight. All I wanted was some suggestions on what I should write back in my second letter. Something simple but effective.
  18. lbrown59

    lbrown59 Well-Known Member

  19. godaddyo

    godaddyo Well-Known Member

  20. lbrown59

    lbrown59 Well-Known Member

    That's true

Share This Page