HELP please! CA trouble -

You can ALWAYS validate.. I would send a validation letter then dispute with the CRA. Read up on the FCRA and FDCPA and wait for them to violate...Also how old is this debt?

 

oops double post

 

I think you should save the letter. Paperwork is important when dealing with credit. Send them a validation and a cease and desist. Are they reporting already?

 

Send them a letter and tell them they are in violation of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1974. (LOL)

 

Have you ever sent a cease and desist letter to a creditor for an amount over 3K? The only time a cease and desist letter should be used is if the debt is past the SOL, paid, or the debt truely isn't yours. Advice like that will get people SUED.

A cease and desist letter gives a creditor just about one option. That is to communicate with you one more time to let you know their course of action. That communication is likely to be delivered to you through a process server, especially for a debt of over 3K.

Gib

 

That is funny.

Gib

 

They are in violation of the clean air act by poluting the air with their Bull Shi* and violating the EPA by poluting the rivers and streams with the run off from their pi**ing on consumers.

 

While what you have said here is quite correct it doen't go far enough.

Cease & Desist can be very dangerous if improperly used as the poster has stated but if it is properly used it can be a powerful tool.

It can be used to prevent collectors from contacting parents or relatives who might otherwise be getting harrassed by collecotors or used to protect you from being contacted at your place of employment thereby saving you from workplace embarrassment and/or harrassment. There are also numerous other ways in which C&D can be used.

As usual, a tool is only as useful as it's operator who must be thoroughly knowledgeable in it's use in order to get maximum results and benefits.

 

Re: Re: HELP please! CA trouble -

Ouch. I didn't mean to give bad advice. I thought the cease & desist letter stopped them from reporting something to the CRAs if they hadn't already. Thank you for correcting this.

 

You have already lost some very minor benefits as a result your failure to respond with validation demand within that initial 30 days following their initial contact with you.

The word initial is extremely important in helping you decide what to do and when to do it. It is also integral to knowing what your rights are under the law and whether or not a violation of law has occurred. That is true whether you responed timely or not for the simple reason that many mandates of the law are predicated on that simple sounding word. That word is the hinge pin upon which many decisions must be made from time to time. Most of the time it isn't operative at all but in a small number of situations it is of paramount importance.

So whether or not to validate is almost never a decision that hinges upon the 30 day rule. The answer is almost always yes, validate and waste no more time doing so.

But although validation seems simple enough it really isn't so simple at all. Like any other tool, getting a thorough knowledge of how to use it is imperative if you want to use it correctly. Far too often we see the disasterous results of those who attempt to use such tools who know little or nothing about them in reality.

Let me illustrate.

As our ability to earn degenerates, our need for credit increases dramatically until what we thought was just a rainy day problem which would soon be over but when the problem continues we then find ourselves in deep water. Staggering debt and it's ensuing problems is growing at a tremendous pace and little or no relief is in sight. That means that desperate people are often willing to try just about anything to alleviate their problems.

One of the forums I am active in is currently discussing the latest thing to come down the pike in the way of debt termination. It is called Notarial Protest and is a proceedure still used today in rare situations within financial institutions. The last known court case dealing with Notarial Protest was in the 19th Century. The year was 1858 if I remember correctly. The normal useage of Notarial Protest is in interbank situations where some check or other has been dishonored although it can theoretically be used in any situation involving negotiable instruments of debt which is what a check is as well as are Federal Reserve Notes(currency), money orders and many other types of such instruments.

For simplification purposes let us say that a check is presented (presentment) to a bank for payment but has insufficient funds in that bank to permit payment. (dishonor) then a protest can be drawn up and signed before a notary public and taken before a court of law on a motion for smmary judgment. While the process is a more complcated than that, the above will suffice for the purposes of this discussion.

So, now we have discovered a valuable new tool with which to thwart the efforts of our creditors.
Here is what we shall do. The collector demands payment of us (presentment) but we are going to blindside this jerk and teach him a new lesson. So we dishonor his demand by means of a validation letter which will dispute (dishonor) his claim and we can then proceed to the nearest Notary Public and have him witness a letter of Notarial Protest which we shall take before a court of law and demand motion for summary judgment against the creditor. The Notary Public is an officer of the court so he can issue such documents which a judge has no other option but to sign and then you can enforce it against the creditor.

The twists and turns in futile attempts to explain why the above theory is so powerful are already nearly legion and each one presented is usually more convoluted than the last. I would strongly advise the use of that and many other theories if you are seriously applying for the position of court jester for the day. Otherwise forget it.

 

Re: Re: HELP please! CA trouble -

Good Heavens no! (LOL) A cease & desist is normally a demand for an invitation to the next available session of debtor's court. It is exactly the same as a written refusal to pay and has exactly the same force and effect. But as a matter of fact I would far rather send a flat out refusal to pay than I had a standard Cease & Desist. Even though they carry the same legal force and effect the Refusal to Pay might very well lead to an erroneous conclusion and subsequent action on the part of the collector which might be used to ones advantage. But a full and unmodified cease & desist is an almost invitation to get sued.

If it is modified so as to stipulate that it can only be construed as being applicable to one's place of employment and not to his home then he has not slammed the door on the debt collector but rather only protected his employment, the source of income which will probably be his only means of paying them.

Relatives who are being bugged by collectors can use a full cease & desist with impunity because they cannot be sued for that which they did not owe.

I have a pretty fair discussion of that with sample cease & desist letters in my resources forum.

 

Bill,
What you have posted seemed interesting for a second, But then I looked up the definition..

. a. a formal notarial statement drawn up on behalf of a creditor and declaring that the debtor has dishonoured a bill of exchange or promissory note.

It seems to be for creditors versus debtors not the other way around.

 

to answer #2 I have no answer..Call the CRA and ask them the addy that is listed on your reports.


Ques. 1. By sending this Validation letter to them now, instead of waiting until I hear from them again, am I not admitting that I did receive their correspondence dated Dec. 30 and just chose not to doing anything about it, and that now, after the 30 days, I am sending the letter? Is this ok?;

Yes send it its ok..

 

Sorry you did not read or understand where I was coming from. What you say is exactly what I was pointing out.

And the main point I was making is that these days people are so desperate for solutions to their problems that they will grab anything, twist it in almost unimaginable ways and use it to try to resolve their problems and if somebody comes up with some hot new idea like Notarial Protest and many more people will pay hard to come by money they should have used to help resolve their problems to buy these ludicrous theories.

People out there are actually spending $5,000 to $10,000 or more for exactly that kind of garbage.

I spoke to one man on the phone one day who told me that he first spent $750 and got 3 books and a CD telling him how to terminate his debt problems. Except it was full of legal forms and legal mumbo-jumbo he simply could not make heads nor tails out of. So he called them up and said he could not understand all that so they fixed him up with a "paralegal" to help him understand and that only cost him another $3,000.

Then they fired that paralegal and he had to pay another $3,000 for another paralegal he could not understand any better than the first one.

And his is not the only horror story I have heard and it isn't likely to be the last one I'll ever hear although I sure hope it is.

The lesson to be learned of course is that we cannot take things out of context and make them work the way we wished they worked instead of the way the actually were meant to work.

Of course, you and most folks realize that but there are also a multitude of people who don't.

 

Re: Re: HELP please! CA trouble -

My question now is, should I wait until I hear from them again?
LRM216
==============
What do you expect to gain from waiting?

The END ************************* LB 59