Discussion in 'Credit Talk' started by Kittw1, Nov 10, 2001.

  1. Kittw1

    Kittw1 Well-Known Member

    Is there an "If you don't fix this, I am going to small claims court letter?"
  2. keepmine

    keepmine Well-Known Member

    As to Cap 1. I depends on how much you owe them and what sort of deal they are offering you. What sort of details can you share?
  3. bbauer

    bbauer Banned

    I suppose there is. But why do you feel a need to have a sample letter to do that? Seems simple enough to me to simply get out the old pen and paper, say that you think they are wrong, prove it to them and state that if they don't fix their error you will refer the matter to your attorney with demand for appropriate remedial action.

    Don't threaten a lawsuit if you don't have the grounds upon which to file one and fully intend to carry it out. Stating that you will refer the matter to your attorney for appropriate remedial action isn't threatening to sue. It intimates that your attorney might sue them or he might cure the problem with a simple letter or whatever. Never let your battleship mouth overload your rowboat ssa.
  4. Kittw1

    Kittw1 Well-Known Member

    Darn Bill, I am one of your fans...You are just slapping me around here this morning all the way from OK!!! Be easy...I am six months in to this, so still new!
  5. Kittw1

    Kittw1 Well-Known Member

    P.S. An item has been reaged and I have the reports to prove it. EQ is refusing to delete and I have pointed out to them that I have the report to prove so.
  6. PsychDoc

    PsychDoc Well-Known Member

    Kitt, I've filed against two CRAs so far and am about to file against the third. (I'll post explicit details, including all the gory minutiae, after I'm finished with all three.) I just wanted to let you know this morning though that I never sent a "do this or else" letter to the CRAs. Instead, I attempted to get the CRAs to do the right thing a couple of times; when they didn't, I simply filed the suit unexpectedly. Surprise! :)

  7. bbauer

    bbauer Banned

    I'm not trying to slap you around. I'm just trying to get you to understand that you ought to have a game plan and that it should go from start to finish. It should not be an "I'll cross that bridge when I come to it if I ever do" plan.

    I've tried about all the ways there are to go at these problems and I've pretty well got a game plan figured out that works until the rules are changed and the game is no longer played in the same way. And when the rules are changed, I plan on being the one changing them if at all possible.

    The game plan I follow is:
    1 Demand validation of the CA.
    2. Request verification of the CRAs, but never dispute them. The major problem with that is that I don't want to dispute with the CRAs because about 50% or more of the time turns out to be an exercise in futility. They come back wanting a reason. I like to head that off at the pass by telling them that the request for verification is part of an investigation into possible illegal acts by the reporter of the information and if they do not unhand the demanded information they might get called into court to answer the demanded questions under oath and they might end up getting charges filed on them for their violation of law on top of that. I like to point out that if the y fail to provide the information I demand they might face civil or criminal charges for violation of the Rico Act and or fraud. Both can be applicable. So I like to head them off at the pass before they waste my time with a bunch of crap.
    3. I want the information for possible use against their co-conspirator, the Collector in the event that the collector might have violated some law or other and that I believe that the CRA has the evidence that I seek and if he attempts to conceal the evidence then he might have even more charges to face.

    If I have not demanded validation to start off with, then what possible evidence could I be looking for? Darn little if any.

    Everything I do is part of a "game plan" and it has a definite beginning and a definite end result and if my desired end result is not met, then somebody is definitely headed for the bathroom, er make that courtroom and when they get there they are not likely to escape unscathed.

    Up until recently, all I really had was bluff and bluster and I had to freely admit that in this and other forums. Now I have eliminated that problem because if I don't get my way then I will simply let qualified and very competent legal counsel handle the problems I can't handle. And the only problems I can't handle are the dumbos who are too stupid to walk and chew gum at the same time. So I have to have some means of waking them up when they simply ignore my demands. A nice fat lawsuit filed against them in something besides a small claims court is the best tool I know of to wake them up with.

    While round after round after round of disputes might get some of the items off one's reports, I don't have any intentions of simply wearing out the cannon firing the rounds. If I have to expend valuable "missiles", I want to hit something besides a damned camel.

    QUEEN_BEE Well-Known Member

    Bill, when you ask the CRA for verification, I believe that they would construe that to be a request for a credit report. Are you asking for anything other than that?
  9. bbauer

    bbauer Banned

    Yes, a request for verification under FCRA is quite different then either a demand for validation under FDCPA or a request for a credit report. Each one is quite clearly defined in law and have no bearing upon the other.

Share This Page