So many people on this board post that ca's won't answer a validation request or send worthwhile validation.How can a debtor trust anything a ca does.Im sure many debtors would settle their debts if the ca's were more trustworthy.If the oc's were not allowed to sell off their defaulted accounts i think all parties involved would be better off.The ca's cause more problems then they solve.The banking industry needs to come up with a better way of dealing with defaulted accounts.There is too much abuse in the collection process on both sides with the current system.A new law needs to be passed limiting the number of times a defaulted account can be sold.This alone would solve many problems.
While I totally agree with you, please remember that we are living in a capitalistic society. The establishment of collection agencies started when the greedy banks did not want to hire significant staff to oversee/collect on their own. This resulted in the creation of shady/crooked collection agencies who probably hire high school dropouts and former convicts.
A debtor has the right to know how much is owed, how the interest and penalties were calculated ,proof that the ca has the legal right to collect on the account.This is not asking for too muchThe debtor should not have to go to court to finally get this information.Ca's should not be allowed to file with the courts unless they can show the courts that they have this information.If a debtor payment arrangement is made an honest monthly statement should be sent showing payments made an what the balance due is.Why should a debtor be given a default judgment because they failed to show up to court to see if the ca can produce the information on the debt.When a ca sends a debtor a collection notice all the above information should be provided right from the start.
Civil law is not necessarily fair, but it is the way life is. Preponderance of the evidence is the standard. You are not required to stand up for the creditors rights, and it is no requirement that they stand up for yours. The FDCPA provides a certain degree of protection of for the alleged debtor, but it is the alleged debtor's responsibility to see that his rights are, in fact, both exercised and protected. The same is true for the state implementations of the UCC. I would expect that the universal recommendations of the guru class, everywhere, would be never knowingly to take a default judgment, and to arm yourself with the knowledge necessary to make sure that if the other side does prevail in court that the preponderance of the evidence that they muster is complete and accurate and dispositive. It's called ensuring due process. Would that it be different, but it isn't.
