And I am a little freaked. My small claims case is a pretty strong one against Arrow Fin. for not validating to me, but verifying everything several times to CRA's. I am not looking for legal advice, but I was wondering if anyone had a link for the counter arguement to the statements that ' CA's dont have to validate paid accounts' and 'CA only have to validate in the first 30 days'. I have searched all over on a ton of boards and get conflicting stuff. I just dont want to stutter in front of the judge. Thanks bunches.
I am just waiting for definitive info on the pp. I have my small claims form all fille dout. I just tdont want to file if I am wrong. But J, what about the validation, eh?
its my understanding that they never have to validate a debt but if they don't validate they must cease all collection activity which includes reporting to a CRA, validating with the CRA or continue to try and collect or call u . and if they keep on validating then u have them on FCRA violations.
Right, what you say is true. I thought that I mentioned that throughout the 3 month period I was requesting Validation, they were consistantly reporting and updating and verifying to the CRA's.
(c) The failure of a consumer to dispute the validity of a debt under this section may not be construed by any court as an admission of liability by the consumer.
Thanks a bunch for the info. I have highlighted all relevant sections and along with those FTC opinion letters think I can counter the possible sticking points of Venue, the 30 day reporting period, and what qualifies as collection activity. As a terribly funny aside, i just got the most NASTY voice mail from the district court in my town. In the message the woman in the meanest way tells me that the Judge DID NOT approve my request for a continuance and that I had more than ample time to prepare and the court date is still for tomorrow. 2 minutes later I get a 2nd call from the court. Turns out the confused me with the Defendant. Much apologizing followed. So i looks like I may just have to give a 5 min spiel on validation and proper reporting to the judge before i get the default judgment! Yeeeeee Haw!
Crappy update. Just got out of court @ 9:30. Arrow won. In my opinion, i did everything right. I provided the judge with the relevant sections of the FDCPA. The cass and wollman letters, excerpts from the spears brennan case RE 30 day validation period. I typed up a brief pleading stating that i was suing for statutory damages of 809(b). Things went to hell when I got a judge I hadnt seen before. I went yesterday to scope out the sc scene, and to see both of the two judges I may get. I got some 3rd random judge. Then, the Agent for Arrow identified himself as an attorney. This is EXPLICITY barred from SC court in my state without prior approval. I know they didnt get prior approval because I got a voicemail from the court yesterday stating that the judge wouldnt grant a contiuance and that attorneys werent allowed. Then during the case, the atty clouded the issue by referencing the FCRA, which I wasnt addressing at all. All told, after 10 minutes the judge determined that I was trying to get accurate info off of my credit report and that arrow only had to validate in the 1st 30 days and since i paid it off in 2001 that I was out of luck. pardon my language but it sucked.
Crappy update. Just got out of court @ 9:30. Arrow won. In my opinion, i did everything right. I provided the judge with the relevant sections of the FDCPA. The cass and wollman letters, excerpts from the spears brennan case RE 30 day validation period. I typed up a brief pleading stating that i was suing for statutory damages of 809(b). Things went to hell when I got a judge I hadn't seen before. I went yesterday to scope out the sc scene, and to see both of the two judges I may get. I got some 3rd random judge. Then, the Agent for Arrow identified himself as an attorney. This is EXPLICITLY barred from SC court in my state without prior approval. I know they didn't get prior approval because I got a voicemail from the court yesterday stating that the judge wouldn't grant a continuance and that attorneys weren't allowed. Then during the case, the atty clouded the issue by referencing the FCRA, which I wasn't addressing at all. All told, after 10 minutes the judge determined that I was trying to get accurate info off of my credit report and that arrow only had to validate in the 1st 30 days and since i paid it off in 2001 that I was out of luck. pardon my language but it sucked.
MASSIVE PISSER! What a closed minded judge. I've read of other cases like this where the judges do not follow the laws and rule out sh** like this. So so sorry! But don't let it stop you. Sueing is something that many of us talk about, but never do. You have guts and it will take you far. Keep it up. 3 cheers for olivse!!
Re: Re: In Court Thursday 3 Cheers Olivse. Sounds like Judicial error. Do you have appeal rights? Or no, because you were the Plantiff? ??? Good job on the guts factor.
Re: Re: Re: In Court Thursday I do, I am going to ask the judge to reconsider, since I was up against an attny and thats a huge nono without permission, which I am 90% sure was not obtained. If she declines, then I can appeal. But I can appeal. And thank you. You are all invaluable.
Re: Re: Re: In Court Thursday If you lose the case and don't have the right to appeal, can you refile in superior or federal?
Re: Re: Re: Re: In Court Thursday If the judge decides not to reconsider my case, then I can appeal. First in SC then in superior. At least if i understand it correctly. It is kinda hard to have perspective in the middle of the rapids!
Re: Re: Re: Re: In Court Thursday It seems that when cases actually go to court, judges tend to side with the creditor/CA. They seem to have the perspective that if you owe the money (or can't immediately prove that you don't owe it), the violations are irrelevant. Maybe when we go to court, we should take more with us than simply a copy of the FCRA/FDCPA. We should arm ourselves with BBB reports, Senate testimony, history of complaints with the AG, the rip-off report, anything we can dig up on the creditor/CA. I suspect that chances are really good that if you've racked up enough violations to take them to court, there are others filing complaints, etc. We need ammunition in court to take the focus off of the alleged debt and back onto the creditor/CA and their history of violations. The FCRA/FDCPA affords protection, but NOBODY wants to enforce those protections. I strongly believe that this is why creditors/CAs so blatantly violate the laws. Just a thought.
