Please let me know what you think of the following validation letter. XX September 2001 All Bank Attn: Susan XXXXXXXX RE: Account #XXXXXXX Dear Susan: This letter is a formal complaint that you are reporting inaccurate and incomplete credit information, and a request that you validate this debt. This item has been reported to and by the different Credit Reporting Agencies in many variations, all of which are incorrect. It is shocking to me the many variations and errors I have seen in how this account has been reported since I learned of the accountâ??s existence. This is NOT a request that you verify that a debt simply exists under this identification information by means of matching account information to my name, and I cannot accept such as proof of debt. I am distressed that this information has been so incorrectly reported to the credit reporting agencies and that someone has failed to maintain reasonable procedures in operations to assure maximum possible accuracy in the reports submitted. Equifax has recently and finally supplied me with your name as the contact person regarding this account. This is not my first attempt to make contact with your organization regarding this account, and I am hoping you are the correct person to contact. Please inform me immediately if you are in fact not the correct person to handle this request, and forward the request to the proper person within your organization who can respond to it. Again, I respectfully request to be provided proof of this alleged debt, specifically the following: 1. Contract bearing my signature. 2. Proof that the amount you are reporting as owed, is in fact owed to you. 3. That the amount owed is by me. 4. The date the item or account became due and was opened. 5. The date the item or account became delinquent. In the absence of the above proof, and proof the item has been and is in fact PRESENTLY being reported correctly, I strongly urge that this item be deleted immediately. The incorrect reporting of this item has already caused me financial loss, and should the item continue to be reported, there are remedies available to me to recover these losses. Alternatively, if the Credit Reporting Agencies have not contacted you or your organization to verify this account as they are required to, please provide me a signed letter stating which of the three Credit Reporting Agencies has failed to contact you. Should this be the case, I will hold harmless All Bank and will not pursue any action against All Bank now or in the future. If I do not receive above-mentioned proof within 30 days of your receipt of the letter, I will consider the debt to not be valid. Thank You, Beth What do you think guys? There are reasons for not being more demanding. I have a lawsuit under way, and need their proof of not being contacted if it exists, and also need proof the account is being reported incorrectly, and finally that she is or is not the correct contact person. If the verification process info is incorrect, that's one more bit of evidence I have against the CRA. I'm also hoping they will realize the possible threat of lawsuit since it has been incorrectly reported in the past, and delete it to avoid any troubles. The account SHOULD be off this month, but is being reported and verified by CRA as a new (year old) charge off. BTW, this account has been reported with two different amounts, and with three completely different date of last activity. Thanks, beth
Well, Beth, there obviously exists one grave problem, not with the letter nor your intended purpose for it, but for someone who really has no idea what a true validation letter really is like or what it is supposed to accomplish but uses it instead of a true validation letter thinking it might be a great way to go based on the fact that you called it a validation letter. Is it a validation letter? In a sense, yes, it is, although it is only designed to perform a very specific purpose which is certainly acceptable too. Do I find anything wrong with your letter? It really does not make any difference whether I do or not. Simple reason is that if it works and does what you want it to do, that's all that makes any difference whatever, right? Hope it works for you.
Bill, for the sake of learning and discussion, what differentiates her letter from a bonafide validation letter? Thanks, Doc
The way I see it is that the major purpose behind a validation letter is to force or attempt to force a 3rd party collector to prove that the debt he is attempting to collect is a valid debt. There are several reasons why I say that this is the sole true use of a validation letter. 1. The process of validation and what it must consist of is clearly outlined in FDCPA. 2. Both original creditors and credit bureaus clearly are protected from FDCPA requirements. 3. FDCPA is clearly aimed at preventing abusive practices by 3rd party collectors of all kinds while giving some degree of protection to those 3rd party collectors who abide by it's rules. The intent is not only to protect consumers from abusive practices by 3rd party collectors but to allow various legal sanctions against those 3rd party collectors who use unfair and abusive practices so that those who abide by the rules do not suffer unfair competition from those who do not. Her statement here: clearly indicates that she has already attempted verification via the credit bureaus but is getting the run-around as to whom is responsible for the report. The true purpose of the properly crafted validation letter is to put the claim of the 3rd party collector at a severe if not fatal disadvantage in his collection efforts. She also at least threatens Estoppel in her letter although not very effectively. Her reasons for writing the letter as she has are clearly and correctly stated. Now then, if you look at all the other validation letters which are in PBM's list of various validation letters, you will see that they are not the same as this validation letter and that the focus or aim is different. Most of those who have been on this forum for any length of time will recognize the differences immediately, so there is no problem for them, but a total newcomer might grab this one and fire it off to some creditor or collector and come up with much less than the desired result when he should have done a bit more research by looking at what is posted by PBM and others. That's my only concern, is the possible mis-use by a less than well informed person, not whether or not this is a validation letter or simply a demand for more information. Her letter is intended for a specific purpose and is therefore specially crafted by her for her specific purpose. A newcomer would be looking for a more general validation letter and PBM has those aplenty listed elsewhere.
Bill is correct, this is not a true validation letter by definition. I took one of the sample letters listed on the sample forum, and changed it to fit my needs. My true aim is not to take action against the original creditor, though I certainly want them to think I will. I am trying to kill two birds with one stone here, so to speak. Get additional evidence against the CRA, and/or get the account deleted by means of veiled threat of legal action, or lastly, have them take enough stock in the threat that they actually research their files and discover that this account should truly be off by now, and delete it. With any of the outcomes, it gives me additional evidence to fight the CRA who appears to be fighting me instead taking a settlement. I fear I now must prepare to defend myself as well should a counter suit be filed. beth
Your fears, of course, might be well founded, but just like what happened on Tuesday this week, you cannot fight what you cannot see coming at you, you cannot defend against every possibility of attack lest you lose all your freedoms in the process. All you can do is wait till they attack and then see what it's going to take to go destroy them.
