Inquiry verification

Discussion in 'Credit Talk' started by sudsman616, Oct 26, 2001.

  1. sudsman616

    sudsman616 Well-Known Member

    Hello all first time poster, (have read many,many,many way too many threads in here, Bayhouse, and yahoo for the past year)

    I have a paid off Discover collection 12/99 (wife paid it off before I began reading boards as this one). My credit reports list this as a paid collection (I know, I know) , Asset Acceptance (^&*%$) decided to put an entry (both an account and inquiry) upon my reports for this account. I have forwarded the validation letter, certified/return receipt. My card was returned signed as of 10/05. I disputed the hard inquiry with experian and when I checked the dispute this a.m. on their site it was verified. I believe via previous postings that I have read is that during a comsumer validation inquiry with a creditor or CA, that no collection efforts may take place. If so, hasn't both the CA and experian in its verification violated FCRA? I look forward to any input that you may have.

    Thanks, have a great day
  2. bbauer

    bbauer Banned

    The correct answer to your question is not quite as easy as it may seem upon it's surface. In fact, it's at least a two part answer and will be quite lengthy. Part of that lengthyness is due to the fact that you have not stated whether or not your demand for validation was sent to Asset Acceptance within 30 days after the receipt of their first demand for payment by them. You need to CLICK HERE and read the pertinent section of the law on that subject.

    Again, your answer will be quite lengthy. First of all, I don't recall that FCRA covers that subject off the top of my head. It's FDCPA that addresses that issue. But more important than which law they broke is the question of whether or not Experian broke any law and that would have to be proven first of all and then it would also have to be proven that they had any part in the collection activity or were they merely acting in the capacity of a credit reporting agency who reported what was reported to them or even whether or not you demanded verification of them during the previously mentioned 30 day time frame if indeed you were timely in your demands to Asset Acceptance. It sounds highly unlikely to me that Experian has broken any laws and most especially not if you didn't demand verificaton of them at the same time that you demanded validation of Asset Acceptance or shortly thereafter.

    I'm quite sure that due to your unhappiness with one or the both of them, you'd just love to find some reason to hang them out to dry. That's not too hard to do if you know all or at least some of the more than 300 ways you can find to use for "clothes pins" and how to construct and mount your attack and carry it to a successful conclusion. It's not at all difficult and most anyone can do it with a bit of study, but one does have to read and thoroughly understand quite a few laws, rules and regulations. It's a lot of fun doing it to them, and it looks like you are peddling as fast as you can. The link I gave you has a lot of material on it that will help you in your quest for knowledge. Keep up the good fight and I hope you have a lot of fun doing it.
  3. LKH

    LKH Well-Known Member

    I don't believe the cra has violated any laws here. The ca may have, as Bill said, IF, you sent the validation letter to them within 30 days of receiving their first notice to you. If not, then no laws have been broken that I'm aware of. Now, the other question is, did they place the notice on your report after it was paid? I'm not sure if that may or may not be a violation. I suggest you go to and look up the FDCPA rules.
  4. sudsman616

    sudsman616 Well-Known Member

    Thank you both for the input, I was unaware that a 'prove it, or remove it' letter was only applicable for the first 30 days after a CA contacts you. The CA reported the month after the account was settled.
  5. bbauer

    bbauer Banned

    I guess you didn't go read the law as I suggested or you didn't understand after you did read it. The law don't say that a "prove it or remove it" letter was only applicable for the first 30 days after a CA contacts you at all. A "prove it or remove it" letter would apply to a credit bureau, not to a CA. A "prove it or remove it" letter would be a demand to the credit bureau for verification. That's entirely different than a "prove it" letter which is a validation letter. The standards are very different for each of them.

    I'm not trying to be mean or advertise my services or trying to prove how hard it is to understand some of these things so you will buy my services as someone might try to imply.
    I'm trying to give you an easy to find link that goes right to the meat of the subjects you need to understand by giving you a link to go study the law for yourself so you will learn the differences and what the law says.

    Well then you have only FCRA to work with. FDCPA can't help you because nobody is trying to collect anything from you. So the 30 day rule would not even apply to you at all. You could still make the 30 day rule apply by going to court and sueing them if you had any reason to sue them in the first place, but you don't. That's what you get for being a nice guy and a responsible citizen and paying off what you owed albeit belatedly.

    Now the only recourse you have is to do as the credit repair companies do and send round after round after round of disputes try to convince the credit bureaus that a lie is the truth and the truth is a lie. I wish you the best of luck. It does work a lot more times than either the government or the credit bureaus would like you to believe.
  6. sudsman616

    sudsman616 Well-Known Member

    the Collection Agency is trying to collect from me, I asked them to validate that I owe them with prove. At the same time I disputed their inquiry with Experian, I have not disputted the account with Experian yet, I was trying to see if the Collection Agency would respond to a verification from Experian and ignore my request for validation that I owe them a debt.
  7. bbauer

    bbauer Banned

    That's reasonable. It just won't make any difference if they do if you are outside of that 30 day window. The only protection that 30 day window provides you is that during that time they must cease all collection activity until they have validated the debt.

    Even if you are outside of the 30 day window, there are still other ways to hang them. Lots of them. Keep up the good work, study hard and learn the laws and you will do just fine. Everybody has to start somewhere and along the way they are going to make lots of mistakes. Simply can't be helped unless you have your own private instructor and this isn't just exactly a subject they teach in school unless you want to count the school of hard knocks.

    I've made my share of them and I'm still learning too. I'm never ashamed to admit I make mistakes and I'm never ashamed to admit that I'm learning. I've learned something new every day of my life and I'll keep on learning till the day I die and maybe even after that in a different way. The day I get so smart I think I can't learn anything new, it's time to wake up and die right.

    Have a nice day.
  8. roni

    roni Well-Known Member

    TODAY'S LESSON.... The Credit Repair Organizations Act...

Share This Page