Has CA lost their mind?!?!

I think that's the standard disclaimer that comes on any communication from a debt collector. I don't know if it's a violation or not.

I finally got Cavalry Investments to close the account they had purchased from Mobil dispite the fact that I had settled with mobil. When they closed it I asked them to send proof and the letter I got went something like this.

Dear Brett... we recieved your communication regarding the above account and are closing the account. We will be notifying the credit bureaus to delete our tradeline from your records.

Then, to my amusement, below that it said

"Please understand this communication is from a debt collector. This is an attemt to collect a debt..."

I doubt any piece of mail goes out from their office without that disclaimer on it, but it is interesting to think that it may be a violation.

Brett

 

Your CA doesn't seem to know what a Validation letter is - it is a demand from you that they make a prima facie case that you owe money. It is not an invitation to a debate contest and it is not a trial by mail. There is absolutely no reason for an alleged debtor to have to produce any proof or documents in the validation stage - that's the job of the CA.

My only letter to the CA at this point would be to tell tem to "prove it, drop it or get sued".

 

Read Sec. 807(11) of the FDCPA

(11) The failure to disclose in the initial written communication with the consumer and, in addition, if the initial communication with the consumer is oral, in that initial oral communication, that the debt collector is attempting to collect a debt and that any information obtained will be used for that purpose, and the failure to disclose in subsequent communications that the communication is from a debt collector, except that this paragraph shall not apply to a formal pleading made in connection with a legal action.

 

Anyone else think this is insane?
amish
=============
No it's a 1000 buck violation in writing.



THE END ** *** ** LB 59
"""""""""```~~~```'"""""""""

 

I doubt any piece of mail goes out from their office without that disclaimer on it, but it is interesting to think that it may be a violation.

Brett
. If that's not an "attempt to collect a debt" though, then I don't know what it. It blatantly says so.
amish
===============
It's a violation that they could have avoided simply by not sending it instead of validating.

To avoid committing a violation they could have either validated or not sent the letter, however they chose to do neither.

THE END ** *** ** LB 59
"""""""""```~~~```'"""""""""
The Bacon Tree

Back in the cowboy days, a westbound wagon train was lost and low on food. No other humans had been seen for days...and then they saw an old Jewish Rabbi, sitting beneath a tree. The leader rushed to him and said, "We're lost and running out of food. Is there someplace ahead where we can get food?"

"Vell, I tink so, " the old man said, "But I vouldn't go up dat hill, und down de udder side. Somevun tole me you'd run into a big bacon tree." "A bacon tree?" asked the wagon train leader. "Yah, ah bacon tree. Vould I lie? ... Trust me, I vouldn't go dere.

The leader goes back and tells his people what the Rabbi said. "So why did he say not to go there?" some pioneers asked. "Oh, you know those Jewish people -- they don't eat bacon."

So the wagon train goes up the hill and down the other side. Suddenly, Indians are attacking from everywhere and they massacre all except the leader who manages to escape back to the old Jewish man. The near-dead man starts shouting, "You fool! You sent us to our deaths!

We followed your instructions, but there was no bacon tree. Just hundreds of Indians, who killed everyone but me."
The old Jewish man holds up his hand and says, "Oy..... vait a minute."

He then gets out an English-Yiddish dictionary, and begins thumbing through. "Oy Gevalt, I made myself such ah big mishtake!
It vuzn't a bacon tree." "It vuz a ham bush!"

 

Re: Re: Has CA lost their mind?!?!

1*The purpose of this letter is to request your assistance so that we can reach a quick resolution of this matter.
Please mail us or fax us a letter outlining the details of your dispute,
2*along with any written proof you may have to support your claim
(examples of proof may include a settled in full letter or a police report in the case of fraud).
3*In the interim, we have requested that the three major consumer reporting agencies change the status of this account to "Disputed."
.........................................................
1* resolution I.E. collection of the debt.
2*Amish you aren't making any claim when you validate therefore you aren't obligated to prove anything
3*What they should have done is validated not made excuses as in # 1 and 2.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1- 2 are efforts to collect the debt & are the violation not the following statement contained in their letter.
("This is an attempt to collect a debt, yadda, yadda, yadda...)

 

Re: Re: Re: Has CA lost their mind?!?!

Calm down Amish,

Jlynn just showed you that they are required to include the "Mini Miranda" in ALL communications.

They cannot be guilty of violating the law by complying with the law. This would put the CA in an unfortunate Catch 22 from which there could be no escape.

Won't happen.

Maybe you're not reading Butch's threads. You should always read Butch's threads.

))

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Has CA lost their mind?!?!

Yeppers, 2 sentances actually.

And I was just teasin ya Amish.

~