Need good 'Intent to Sue' letters

i pieced this one together from a bunch of sources..

i just sent i to a collection agencey...


To President-CEO and/or Office Manager

This letter shall serve as formal notice of my intent to file a lawsuit against your company, due to your blatant and objectionable disregard for the FDCPA, the FCRA and my rights as a consumer. Your blatant disregard and violations of these statutes have caused harm to me by seriously affecting my otherwise unblemished credit rating and causing the denial of credit as well as causing me to be charged higher interest rates and unfavorable loan terms.

On DEC 4 2001, Money Control received a demand for validation letter from me dated November 30,2001. The U.S. post office return receipt shows it signed it for and delivered. As of today you have failed to provide me with the proof I have lawfully requested as per the FDCPA.

I sent a second letter. The U.S. post office return receipt shows signed it for on JAN 14, 2002. I received a questionnaire form from you dated JAN 15,2002 which I signed for on JAN 22, 2002. Your questionnaire was not a validation and does not need to be answered and does not meet the requirements of my request as I lawfully requested..

The FDCPA states you must cease collection activity until you have produced verification of the alleged debt if so requested. As per my conversation with the FTC, this includes reporting to the credit bureaus and continuing collection efforts in the form of any correspondence besides validation, which you obviously have done illegally. It is quite evident that no such proof of this alleged debt exists or you would have provided it in the previous 2 months since it was requested. Also, when an alleged debt is disputed, a notation must be entered on the debtors credit report showing the item is in dispute. Again, this was not done.

Based on your letter dated 1/15/2002, I assume that you cannot validate this debt and therefore I am demanding that you cease any and all collection efforts associated with the above referenced account.
It is not my duty to validate your debt. You choose by being business as a collection agency to maintain the highest possible records of accuracy and to maintain and collect valid debts.

My last Letter was an Estoppel letter (doctrine of estoppel by silence, Engelhardt v Gravens (Mo) 281 SW 715, 719). The previous letter before that was a debt validation letter. Money Control is required by law to validate this debt to me the consumer as covered in the FDCPA. You have failed to do so in a reasonable time as prescribed in the FDCPA.

Iâ??m sure you are aware of the consequences in violating the Fair Credit Reporting Act and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act as well as the multiple violations your company is now responsible for. If not, let me point them out for you.

1) Failure to respond to validation letter date November 30,2001 with in 30 days and continuing collection efforts by validating the debt with Consumer Reporting Agencies. Violating the FDCPA § 809.
(AS per FTC opinion letter:
II. "Is it permissible under the FDCPA for a debt collector to report, or continue to report, a consumer's charged-off debt to a consumer reporting agency after the debt collector has received, but not responded to, a consumer's written dispute during the 30-day validation period detailed in § 1692g?" As you know, Section 1692g(b) requires the debt collector to cease collection of the debt at issue if a written dispute is received within the 30-day validation period until verification is obtained. Because we believe that reporting a charged-off debt to a consumer reporting agency, particularly at this stage of the collection process, constitutes "collection activity" on the part of the collector, our answer to your question is No. Although the FDCPA is unclear on this point, we believe the reality is that debt collectors use the reporting mechanism as a tool to persuade consumers to pay, just like dunning letters and telephone calls. Of course, if a dispute is received after a debt has been reported to a consumer reporting agency, the debt collector is obligated by Section 1692e(8) to inform the consumer reporting agency of the dispute.

IV. "Would the following action by a debt collector constitute continued collection activity under § 1692g(b): reporting a charged-off consumer debt to a consumer reporting agency as disputed in accordance with § 1692e(8), when the debt collector became aware of the dispute when the consumer sent a written dispute to the debt collector during the 30-day validation period, and no verification of the debt has been provided by the debt collector?" Yes. As stated in our answer to Question II, we view reporting to a consumer reporting agency as a collection activity prohibited by § 1692g(b) after a written dispute is received and no verification has been provided. Again, however, a debt collector must report a dispute received after a debt has been reported under § 1692e(8). From FTC opinion letter John F. LeFevre, Attorney December 23, 1997)
2) Failure to provide any validation for this alleged debt as requested in my validation request letter dated November 30, 2001 CRRR, and Estoppel letter dated January 10, 2002 CRRR and continuing collection efforts by contacting me by CRRR on letter dated 1/15/02 with out any validation and seeking further information from me which is not required by law. â??The statute requires that the debt collector obtain verification of the debt and mail it to the consumer Because one of the principal purposes of this Section is to help consumers who have been misidentified by the debt collector or who dispute the amount of the debt, it is important that the verification of the identity of the consumer and the amount of the debt be obtained directly from the creditor. Mere itemization of what the debt collector already has does not accomplish this purpose. As stated above, the statute requires the debt collector, not the creditor, to mail the verification to the consumerâ?- FTC Staff John F. LeFevre, Attorney, Division of Credit Practices (See Ost v. Collection Bureau, Inc., 493 F.Supp. 701 (D.N.D. 1980); Graziano v. Harrison, 950 F.2d 107 (3d Cir. 1991); Miller v. Payco General American Credits, Inc., 943 F.2d 482 (4th Cir. 1991) et seq ). Violating the FDCPA § 809.
3) False and misleading statements based on your statement that a negative mark may transmitted to a Credit Reporting Agency if I do not full fill my credit obligations is considered coercive and misleading because you have not validated the debt as per FDCPA § 809 is a violation of the FDCPA § 807.
4) Verifying this Debt as Valid with a Consumer Reporting Agency with out validating the debt as per FDCPA § 809 with consumer is a violation of the FCRA § 611
5) Not notifying any such said Consumer Reporting Agency that the consumer is disputing the debt is a violation of the FCRA § 623


continued

 

6) Violating the Estoppel Letter (doctrine of estoppel by silence, Engelhardt v Gravens (Mo) 281 SW 715, 719) sent Jan 10,2002 signed for on Jan 14,2002 by continuing collection efforts in the form of a questionnaire and continuing reporting of the collection account to Experian, Trans Union, and Equifax is a violation of this case law as well as the FDCPA and the FCRA.

As per the FDCPA:

§ 813. Civil liability [15 USC 1692k]
(a) Except as otherwise provided by this section, any debt collector who fails to comply with any provision of this title with respect to any person is liable to such person in an amount equal to the sum of --
(1) any actual damage sustained by such person as a result of such failure;
(2) (A) in the case of any action by an individual, such additional damages as the court may allow, but not exceeding $1,000

As per the FCRA

§ 616. Civil liability for willful noncompliance [15 U.S.C. § 1681n]
(a) In general. Any person who willfully fails to comply with any requirement imposed under this title with respect to any consumer is liable to that consumer in an amount equal to the sum of
(1) (A) any actual damages sustained by the consumer as a result of the failure or damages of not less than $100 and not more than $1,000; or
(B) in the case of liability of a natural person for obtaining a consumer report under false pretenses or knowingly without a permissible purpose, actual damages sustained by the consumer as a result of the failure or $1,000, whichever is greater:
(2) such amount of punitive damages as the court may allow; and
(3) in the case of any successful action to enforce any liability under this section, the costs of the action together with reasonable attorney's fees as determined by the court.
(b) Civil liability for knowing noncompliance. Any person who obtains a consumer report from a consumer reporting agency under false pretenses or knowingly without a permissible purpose shall be liable to the consumer reporting agency for actual damages sustained by the consumer reporting agency or $1,000, whichever is greater.
(c) Attorney's fees. Upon a finding by the court that an unsuccessful pleading, motion, or other paper filed in connection with an action under this section was filed in bad faith or for purposes of harassment, the court shall award to the prevailing party attorney's fees reasonable in relation to the work expended in responding to the pleading, motion, or other paper.
§ 617. Civil liability for negligent noncompliance [15 U.S.C. § 1681o]
(a) In general. Any person who is negligent in failing to comply with any requirement imposed under this title with respect to any consumer is liable to that consumer in an amount equal to the sum of
(1) any actual damages sustained by the consumer as a result of the failure;
(2) in the case of any successful action to enforce any liability under this section, the costs of the action together with reasonable attorney's fees as determined by the court.
(b) Attorney's fees. On a finding by the court that an unsuccessful pleading, motion, or other paper filed in connection with an action under this section was filed in bad faith or for purposes of harassment, the court shall award to the prevailing party attorney's fees reasonable in relation to the work expended in responding to the pleading, motion, or other paper.

And also violations and fines are enforceable by the FTC, Los Angles County District Attorney, County and State Regulatory Commissions and The State of California Attorney General as per § 621 of the FCRA .

Also be aware attempts to collect unverifiable debt constitutes mail fraud in the United States of America and the State of California.
As a brief summary I state the following:
Your firm has failed to send the legally required validation of this debt. You have been notified that your actions are detrimental to me and that your firm has violated (including but not limited to) the Consumer Credit Protection Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
Your firm knew or should have known that the actions taken against me and the information collected about me was inappropriate and damaging to me.
Failed to use reasonable care in the course of business and failed to use even minimal procedures to ensure that I was not harmed.
Communicated and are continuing to communicate incorrect and defamatory information to third parties including but not limited to, Equifax, Experian, and Trans Union.
As a result of these blatantly reckless, wanton, and intentional acts, I have suffered and continue to suffer general and specific damages. I am also very upset at your firm's intentional infliction of emotional distress and at the other diminishments of the quality of my life.
I am no longer asking for validation as your time has expired to provide such validation. I am now demanding the immediate and complete removal of this Collection Account from my credit reports (Equifax, Experian, and Trans Union).
As I am currently attempting to apply for credit, time is of the essence. Please understand that I am extremely concerned about the consequences of the actions your firm is having on my life. Please be advised that, if this matter is not resolved by February 4, 2002, I will take any and all necessary steps to protect my rights.

If you wish to resolve this matter, this will be your last opportunity to do so. The following items must be deleted from my credit files with the three major credit reporting bureaus (Equifax, Experian, Trans Union) within 1 week from the date of this letter or by February 4, 2002 and you forward me a letter stating they have been removed and will not reappear on my credit reports again. I will except nothing less.

Please be aware if these accounts are not deleted by February 4, 2002, I will be filing a lawsuit for multiple violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act and The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. I will be seeking civil liability from Money Control as outlined in the FCRA and FDCPA. Please also be aware I will file a formal complaint with the Federal Trade Commission, The California State Attorney General, and the Better Business Bureau.

For the purposes of 15 USC 1692 et seq., this Notice has the same effect as a dispute to the validity of the alleged debt and a dispute to the validity of your claims. This Notice is an attempt to correct your records, and any information received from you will be collected as evidence should any further action be necessary.

Thank you and I look forward to Money Control resolving this most expeditiously.

love

da kustom kat.

i have one another one but it is on my computer at work... to a CRA


Kev

 

kustom kat,

Thanks a million for that template! Coldly threatening, but not hysterical. Saves me a bunch of time in formulating a couple of letters I need to send out by serving as a starting point. Sometimes that's the hardest part.

I'd love to see your other letter, BTW.

Thanks Again!

Tom

"The Move Is Made!... Finally!!!"