Ok, First, I want to appologize for being UNUSUALLY lacking in details in this post. But with the nature of the reply from the CA, you may see that with a reply that is this unique, it would be obvious to the president of the CA that I'm talking about him, if he, or any of his employees happen to stumble on the post. I got a reply from the one states AGs office to the OC's complaint about two weeks ago, and faxed my response to them. Luckily, the OC hung the CA out to dry by trying to defend the CA without actually 'doing the math'... Sorry Charlie, when the numbers keep rising it isn't a 50% Collection Fee, its INTEREST... Anyhow, today I get a reply from the one states AGs office to the one CA's (CA#1 -- who hired an outside CA#2 as well.) complaint. I am so glad that I provided all the physical evidence to back up my "false and libelous claims" "which are without merit" with the disputes to the AGs office. Anyhow, the cover letter from the AGs office basically says that the AGs office has done everything that they can, and matters such as this, unless there is a proven pattern, is civil litigation. But they also forwarded a copy of the complaint to the FTC as well. The best part of the CAs response, after I am accused of libel, of course, is that the president of the company would be happy to personally discuss this matter with me, he is sure that we can come to an understanding if I would just be willing to pick up the phone and give him a phone call. No one in their right minds would see an illegible, and unitemized 'fax' of a one page historical summary; to be complete validation; circa 1998 no less... And according to the OC they never accepted the 'agreement' because they had changed the terms from what was on the 'outdated application' which was submitted when the account was opened. I do have a handfull of FDCPA violations for this alleged account (which even with their 'interest' which the OC has said the CA isn't charging anyhow, still comes to less than $1,000). The biggest of which they verified with Experian one day before they 'obtained and mailed' the verification. And now that the OC was nice enough to provide proof that the CA couldn't charge interest, and that what the CA was charging is a collection fee, misrepresenting the amount, and character of the debt; and charging fees not allowed. Now, is their claims that I am committing libel any violations (not FDCPA violations, but wouldn't that be Libel, and Defamation of Character? -- well, I guess it could also be falsely representing that the consumer has committed a crime.) If I remember correctly from the one or two rulings on CRAs for defamation, the defamitory statements have to be received by at least one other person other than the consumer, and in this case the letter from the CA was to two AGs offices. BTW: if any of the experts want more information on this and e-mails me mails on I can give out more information personally, but I don't want the CA to tip off the CA any more to what is coming than they've already been tipped off to in the complaints to the AGs and BBBs, and FTC.
