Re: Re: Re: HELP please! CA trouble - never mind.. he didnt say dont send it certified mail..he said dont write that into the letter.. DUH!! My bad Bill...
Re: Re: Re: HELP please! CA trouble - Something like that. Dear Sirs: It is my understanding that you claim I owe a debt. I would like to resolve this matter at the earliest possible moment. In order to accomplish that in an expeditious manner I must request that you validate your claim. Please do so at your earliest convenience. Sincerely _______________ Joe Goodcredit While you may have other issues or points that you might also like to raise or establish in the same letter and if so should do so by all means the above is all in the world they should need. And if it isn't that's their problem. The first sentence establishes the purpose of the letter and the second raises their hopes of getting cash fairly quickly once they comply with your seemingly simple request although you didn't say exactly how you intended to "resolve the matter" they will assume it is with cash. Of course, that is the case. You just didn't say whose cash would be used to resolve the matter. They naturally assume it will be your cash and I full well intend to do all in my power to make damned good and sure it is their cash that will resolve the matter, not mine. Just remember the Miranda law. No, not that one! The one that says that anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. So what does the wise criminal do when arrested? SHUT UP! Thats what he does. And of course demands to see a lawyer.
Re: Re: Re: HELP please! CA trouble - You just didn't say whose cash would be used to resolve the matter. They naturally assume it will be your cash and I full well intend to do all in my power to make damned good and sure it is their cash that will resolve the matter, not mine. ----------------------------------------------------------- Exactly!!! LOL
Re: Re: Re: HELP please! CA trouble - Gee! They should give the teacher a nice shiny red apple for that(LOL) I disagree with that and some disagree with me. OOOOOOH NO! CRAs have 30 days to complete their investigation. Then they have to respond to you in a reasonable time thereafter. I contend that the CAs have to have the completed validation in your hands in a reasonable length of time. Lots of difference.
Re: Re: Re: HELP please! CA trouble - *after cleaning the egg off my face, glad my skin is pretty thick* Thanks, Bill and Knox!
Re: Re: Re: HELP please! CA trouble - You betcha! Every time and without fail. While you hope to high heaven you never see the inside of a courtroom you still have to conduct yourself in accordance with what the judge is likely to rule if you ever do get inside one. The plaintiff says he mailed you a letter then in the judge's eyes he mailed it beyond a shadow of a doubt. The defendant(you) say you mailed something the judge says "I'll believe it if you can prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt." It might not be fair even though it is supposed to be a court of equity, but that's just the way it is. All courts are assumed to be courts of equity but nothing could be further from the truth.
Re: Re: Re: HELP please! CA trouble - Ok..I have an update on this and need advice: I disputed this Cap1 account with TU as "not mine" (which it is not) on 2/14. I received CMRRR on 2/22. I mailed validation to RMA on 2/27. The CMRRR is dated and signed on 3/3. On 3/8, I recieve a collection/settlement letter dated 3/4. I am not sure how to proceed. I requested an updated copy of my TU report to verify if the account is listed as "in dispute". From my readings on the board (and which I will search for information now) this is a violation on RMA under FDCPA § 809. Validation of debts [15 USC 1692g]. Am I correct???
Re: Re: Re: HELP please! CA trouble - I am unsure of what TOP stands for (not in the CN Glossary). Care to explain? Thanks!
Re: Re: Re: Re: HELP please! CA trouble - bump, again I can't believe no one has an opinion on this........ I can not locate a similiar situation in the Archives......but, thank for reading.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: HELP please! CA trouble - if RMA sent you a collection letter (check the postmark) after they signed for your validation request, and they never validated, then it is a violation. however, RMA will almost never respond to validation attempts with anything but collection notices. I've been through them twice now. One time the line just disappeared, the other time I got an apology letter from them after sending an estoppel to their corporate headquarters in atlanta. (search for my past postings, I think I put it all on creditnet) 1. Don't call the CA, someone posted above that you should call the CA for their address , no don't do this. Especially dont call NCO or RMA, it will only serve to piss you off greatly and wont help your case because they wont tell you jack. You may also end up getting trapped into saying something you dont want to say. ya im paranoid. Their are many ways to find an address of a CA out there...one way is to ask members of this board who've dealt with them before. another way is to find their website (search on google or something) I personally believe you should clearly spell out every item in your letter to them to indicate that you know what you are talking about, even though you may not. Either way they arent going to take you seriously 99% of the time. But at least if you spell everything out you have something more to show the judge should it ever come to that, and they wont be able to say you werent clear with your requests.
