Ok, I need some advice on what my next action should be. 1. Sent settlement letter to collection agency. They called me and said that they could not sign the letter, that's it, they said nothing else. I just said "ok". Debit is dentist bill dated back to 1997, its only on TU Report, DA is April 1997, DR is August 1997. What should I do next? Just pay it ($209). I need to get it taken care of as soon as I can. 2. Sent validation letter to collection agency for check cashing service for $385. Its only on EXP report, due to fall off in 9/2004. Its been verified, but I think they only verified it based on address alone. The validation they sent me was a copy of the check, with my old address on there, and that's it. Is this proper validation? I guess I can't call experian, tell them I never lived at that address and then try to have them re-verify it can i? Or am I screwed and have to pay this too? Advice? By contacting these CA's, will they updated my credit report? Thanks, Eric
If the accounts are time-barred, send the CA notice that the accounts are time-barred. Any future collection activity is misrepresentation of the legal status of the alleged debt. Equifax is a pain when it comes to removing any old addresses for any reason. They point blank refused to remove an address that hasn't been my home address since High School (dispite that it is way obsolete under the FCRA.) Oh, and make sure that you TAR the notice that the account is time-barred. It'll prevent the OC from shopping for a new CA to handle it. I TAR anything that I send to a CA out of habit now. "Notice to agent is notice to principal. Notice to principal is notice to agent. Applies to all successors, and assigns."
What is TAR? Anyone else have suggestions? I don't really think that a photocopy of a personal check is proper validation, and it appears that they only validated based on address.
Jam, the SOL time bars a company from sueing you. They can still attempt to collect. SOL is an affirmative defense in court. I dunno what TAR is either. On the doctor bill, if you are trying to clear it for a mortgage or something, I would offer them like a 30% settlement if they agree to delete the TL. Let them know you know they can't sue you My .02 on that one. On the NSF check. A court might deem it proper validation. Did you know exactly what IS validation has never been defined? Double check your state's SOL for NSF checks - it could be different?
The tar clause is a notice that makes the correspondence stickier than just a regular notice. If you've ever had an account recalled by the oc or sold when you've requested validation, you're in the situation that a tar clause would help to tackle. "Notice to agent is notice to principal. Notice to principal is notice to agent. Applies to all successors and assigns." Basically, when I sent this notice to the agent (CA), this is also notice that the principal (OC) has been notified of this correspondence, and vice versa. If ANYONE attempts to transfer or sell this account to evade the notice, you must also provide them with this notice.
