On July 26th a CA called about a gas bill they screwed up on. They said it had been in collections since I think october of 2001. I told them I wished to dispute with my validation request and they told me to fax it in which I did. Today a guy from their company called and said he was trying to avoid a lawsuit and would I like to settle. I said well what about my validation request. He said he knew nothing about it. I told him I had faxed 2 copies over but he said no problem he would send me the old bills but he really did not have to. I said sure you do nobody has shown a shred of proof about this bill. Basically they 1)did not provide validation and 2) called to collect during the validation period. He said he sent the original mini miranda in october which I never got and my 30 days to validate are up now. HUH? Then I ask him what about the cease and desist statement I made in my validation letter. He said he knew nothing about it and it must have gotten lost. So it counts that we never got our mini miranda but it is ok for his company to lose 2, yes 2, cease and desist letters. However, he did not sound too happy over the phone and I think he knew his company screwed up. Even after telling him yes I wanted validation he still offered a settlement on the account. Also, this is my wife's account. Is it legal for a CA to talk to a spouse? What do you think I should do now. He got him self into about 5 violations just during that phone call. Also, 2 weeks ago they used their lawyer to call and leave a message. All the message said was call the law offices of kevin springer at xxx. I called and they told me oh, there must have been a mistake and I was to call xxx number which turned out to be the CA. Isn't that illegal? Isn't it also illegal for an attorney who is representing the CA to not give any mini miranda or any statement that they are involved?
Ok it seems the CA can talk to a spouse legally which leaves me with an imporant question that probably was answered here but I need proof. The FDCPA states you have the 30 days to dispute after the initial communication. What happens if you do not validate during those 30 days or you never received the initial communication letter and a year later they call and say the validation process in the FDCPA no longer applies. I need case laws or some proof the validation still holds water as I may need this for court. please help.
Do they have proof they sent the letter to you in OCt 2001? did you sign for it? Oh it got lost like those 2 C&D letters it seems. See if the local sheriff gets lost when he delivers the civil suit againt them.
Yeah I know it. They will just say it is normal business to send out those initial letters regular postal and who knows the judge might accept it. I do not want to go to court unless all my ducks are in a row. Anyone know my above question?
I dont believe you lose your right to validate just because the CA stated we sent the letter... You always have the right to validate even after the 30 days... Just say to the judge " I dont believe this is mine". If the CA can prove it is i have no problem paying my debt... Then ask the judge if he would pay money on something that he doesnt believe is his... In small claims in Ohio anyway you go before a magistrate... The one i went in front of asked if the CA sent proof and to show him any proof that they sent the letter...
Ok neo if he asked for proof he sent the letter did the CA state yes we did and our proof is our computer printout stating we sent it. Obviously they cannot prove it. I guess this would just come down to the magistrages opinion which is what I do not want. I want cold hard proof. I am already not happy with myself that I did not tape this conversation because they could just say it never existed.
okay firstly how many violations do you have on this CA??? Even if the magistrate believes the CA did in fact send the letter it still does not dipute the fact that you still want proof of the debt... Now where in the FDCPA does it state that you lose the right to dispute if you dont respond within 30 days of receiving the CA's letter. in fact according to the FDCPA... (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.
1)first I have him violating the cease and desist order. He said he never got it. I sent TWO faxes with a cease and desist. They may have a hard time explaining how they lost 2 of them. Stupidly enough, after I told him about this he said I just had to tell him orally not to call and that would be enough for him. then he says he will call back in about 10 days. DUH IDIOT. I hope he does because this time my tape recorder will be on. He said he had about 5000 cases and he cannot keep track of them all. That is not my problem. I am gonna ceritify another cd letter today and hope they are dumb enough to "lose" that one also. 2)They had an attorney call me 2 weeks ago who stated they had 'called in error' and I was to call another number that turned out to be a CA. I have to look up the statute but I know that is illegal. 3)He said the law office that represents them asked him to call and try and get a settlement before it went to court. then 5 minutes later he turned around and said they never take anyone to court over a simple gas bill. 4)He called to collect on a debt that was in the 30 day validation process. Bad move. I could tell by his voice he knew he screwed up. He tried to cover it by making it seem like everything was ok but he was shaken. The certified c/d letter goes today. I am gonna sit on it and see if he is dumb enough to call. I will then tape it and send an intent to sue.
Ok, the FDCPA states "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 lliability by the consumer"---so, whether you got the first letter or not, you haven't waived any rights by not responding before now!!
You can't demand BOTH a C&D and a validation of a CA. The only way they can legally validate for you is to sue you and give evidence in court! Either you want them to talk to you or you don't. Don't be so quick with the C&D's.
You can ask that the CEASE AND DESIST any collection activity during and only until the validation process is completed. Cable you are right though, use the C&D as a last resort. The last thing we want to convey to the courts is that we do not want to handle or settle a matter. We want to show all reasonale means were used to try and settle a matter, correct such and or notify the source of their willful violations. Only if you know validation will get you no where and the hounding and harrassing won't stop should you send a C&D. Tac
It's never a good idea to do a total C&D. It cuts off ALL communication. Their only alterantive then is to file suit. Better to do a partial C&D and reduce all comm. to mail only.
Um, I don't know where you are getting the idea that if you give them a C&D that their only other option is to sue. By the FDCPA, they can NOT file a suit without having provided complete validation. § 805. Communication in connection with debt collection [15 USC 1692c] (c) CEASING COMMUNICATION. If a consumer notifies a debt collector in writing that the consumer refuses to pay a debt or that the consumer wishes the debt collector to cease further communication with the consumer, the debt collector shall not communicate further with the consumer with respect to such debt, except -- (1) to advise the consumer that the debt collector's further efforts are being terminated; (2) to notify the consumer that the debt collector or creditor may invoke specified remedies which are ordinarily invoked by such debt collector or creditor; or (3) where applicable, to notify the consumer that the debt collector or creditor intends to invoke a specified remedy. As far as jumping from letters to litigation, see below: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20580 Division of Credit Practices Bureau of Consumer Protection June 13, 1995 F. Guthrie Castle, Jr., Esq. 301 Koger Center 6555 Quince Road Memphis, TN 38119 Dear Mr. Castle: This is in reply to your letter of March 17, 1995, concerning proper verification of a debt under Section 809 of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). I apologize for the delay. In answer to question #1: Section 809 of the FDCPA does not prescribe any effective date for a Section 809(b) verification. Therefore, providing a verification which pre-dates the debtor's dispute does not appear to be a violation of that Section. ***In answer to question #2: in view of the recent Supreme Court case, Heintz et al v. Jenkins, (No. 94-367; 1995 U.S. Lexis 2840), decided April 18, 1995, which considered litigation activity to recover a debt to be "collection activity" covered by the FDCPA, it does not appear that a debt collector may attempt to reduce a disputed claim to judgement without obtaining the verification required by Section 809(b).*** Make no mistake, they must follow procedure or end up like the other CAs that have been taken to the cleaners by the FTC for illegal operations. If they do not provide COMPLETE validation of the debt before suing you, they open themselves up not only to losing their case, but you obtaining a judgment against them. Actually, my boyfriend is going through that right now. I'll let you know what happens.
I'll give you the background. My man and his ex had a car together. A lease. When they gave it back, they owed for wear and tear. This was over a year and a half ago. They had pulled his credit 3-4 times, but never contacted him about payment until now. Well, she decided since he did everything for her while they were together, that he could just keep doing it and sent the collection agencies after him. She gave them his work number and they called him. When he got home he told me what happened. He told me he had said a curse word and she told him he was being taped. This is half way through the conversation. So I FedEx-ed them a validation letter to which they never responded back in May. He heard nothing(his assistant gets his mail, just another witness to testify that he never received anything from them) until his ex sent him a copy of a summons. They didn't send him anything, just her. If if were not for her, he would not have known about it. So he is suing them in small claims for their violations of the FDCPA. I'm waiting for his credit reports to see if we should add violations of the FCRA as well. We haven't gotten a court date yet. The summons gave them 30 days to respond. I'm sending them a letter on Monday for him letting them know that they have 5 days to drop the case or they are being sued. He'll sue them anyway, but you have to look like you tried. His ex wanted to pay them and he tried to explain the laws to her, but she's a whiny little brat. They've also added about $500 in interest now. Let her pay it, but he's not going to. Oh, on Monday some complaints are going to be filed on the CA. It 's a law office with HUGE departments purely for debt collection. I got the infor from their own website. I'm filing with the BBB, the FTC and the AG.
Damn. I had almost finished responding to you when I did something wrong(took the kids to Chuck E. Cheese, need I say more?) First, the quote I put in there was from the FDCPA itself. Take it up with the FTC if you don't think it's correct. I did not change its context at all. The second was the complete letter, I even left in a part that had no bearing on my point. If you take issue with that, once again, take it up with the FTC. I have been dealing with CAs that ignore me until I file suit. Why? They can NOT provide validation because I am not the one who incurrred the debt. They have known this for months and have tried to make me pay for something purely because it was in my name and on my social. Bullsh*t. It's not mine and I'm not paying it. If they provide full validation and it is your debt, pay it for deletion. It's possible, I've helped friends of mine do it successfully-and legally. I have sued CAs for violating the laws because that is all they understand. That and writing to their governing bodies. It's akin to the teacher giving you detention when you act up in class. If you continue to act up and don't straighten up, what happens? You get sent to the principal. What happens when you continue to misbehave? The principal calls your parents. Then your funny butt is sitting in the house alone while your friends are out having a ball. That or your behind is sore as hell from the spanking. It's not like you didn't know that it was coming. So you can't say it's not fair. You just didn't think that they would. Now for court. If the CA has the proper paperwork, they should provide it immediately when it's requested. If they are indeed legally allowed to collect on it, then they have the OC to go to directly for assistance. Legal action is not something that most people are anxious to commence. The majority of us could go our whole life without seeing the inside of a courtroom. So if we sue, it's because we're exasperated. If we have given them past(way past) the 30 days plus another month or 2 and all they have done is ignore us or try to threaten us with actions they can not possibly do(but not provided validation), what other alternative is there? And if after 3-4 months of ignoring us a CA provides the validation in court, there is not a judge alive that is not going to throw the book at THEM. He's going to want to know why they are wasting his time when the matter could have been handled before getting to him. If you go into court with 4 months worth of faxes and/or CMRRR receipts that have gone ignored(it's happened to me, and it's now 5 months without a WORD-I'm letting my lawyer handle it now), the judge is going to wonder why there was no answer until legal action was taken. What is the CA going to say? Not a damn thing. So it boils down to this if you are a CA that wishes to stay out of trouble: 1. Only collect on debts that are transferred or assigned to you, not sold.( If you do your job well, OCs will WANT you to collect on their charge offs for them. You won't have to buy debts. ) 2. Hire people that know how to conduct themselves. Monitor all phone calls and immediately terminate those that berate, swear at, lie to or otherwise harrass customers. 3. Work with the "debtor". Most people can not pay off a large bill all at once. That's why they need credit. Think about it. Drop the interest and let them pay the principal in installments. Your accounts receivable will go through the roof. 4. Have monthly seminars to refresh your collectors on the FDCPA, FCRA and your state's civil code. Make them aware that anything that they individually do that costs the company money will come out of THEIR paycheck. (They get a commission added when they collect, they'll get penalties taken out as well.) I could go one. But the fact is that most CAs are too interested in the almighty dollar and can't see past their next paycheck. I have yet to see a debt collector driving a Ferrari. I have , however, seen plenty of Cas and OCs get fined millions of dollars for underhanded, illegal manners of doing business. Some have even been barred from debt collecting ever again. I've already settled out of court for a CA pulling my credit twice when they had no cause. Three others have attempted to settle for multiple violations of the FDCPA, FCRA, etc. and even admitted to being wrong, but have not wanted to compensate me for what I've lost due to the listings on my reports. So they can tell it to the judge. I didn't incur the charges. I told them that it was fraud and offered the evidence supporting my claims. This was months before they did their own investigations that ended up the same way- the accounts were not mine. How can you admit guilt, yet not want to compensate for the damages that you not only caused, but let linger? I am one consumer that is not afraid to make them stand up and answer. At least not for what they did to me. In fact, I will be able to dissect the law better. As a result of all of this I have decide to go to law school. I'm getting off of my soapbox now. It's free for anyone else who would like to use it.
