NEVER deal w/Collection Agency

Re: Fair Credit Reporting Act 15 U

I do want to make sure credit is given and not to me...

the letters I used came from Kielsky and Due process... and a few phrases I took from Guerilla Credit repair and a few other books...

I make notes of all good ideas no matter where I get them... but they certainly aren't my original ideas so I just want to truly give credit to the people I got my information from in the first place...

there is only letter floating around that I could even vaguely call mine and I wrote it in a fit of anger to Atlanta Gas Light... and it worked (hehe)

Of course, the best part of all this is that we all come together and make good ideas GREAT.

I honestly think Lizardking's letter is the best one of them all and his attitude, thank goodness, is very contagious!

His ideas of purposefully catching them on everything and slamming them with lawsuits and not just sending letter after letter threatening action is right on the mark and is the only way to really get things done... so I definitely thank him for all his ideas...

and Kristy too... her advice is always top notch...

 

Anybody could Update?

Funny, I rarely read here anymore and I happened along this thread. I actually thought to myself "why would I not want to deal with a collection agency?" My old post title actually surprised me. Collection agencies violate the law so much I now welcome wholeheartedly their involvement with my friends' screwed up finances. Their violations give consumers leverage.

To answer the disparaging comments regarding my intelligence, you'll be happy to note I'll be adding a "juris dumbass" degree to my B.B.A, M.S, and M.B.A. I am sadly lacking a formal â??B.S.â? degree, although I do find it quite helpful to possess a bit of it when negotiating. Never underestimate the â??stupid consumerâ? who just canâ??t see the correctness of your side and who will still take you to court no matter how many times defendantâ??s counsel tells you theyâ??ve been to law school, they know more than you do, they pound pro se litigants into the ground, and that they are correct fully in their position, and that their client/company is in complete and total compliance with all laws (all the while theyâ??re writing down your address to send you your settlement agreement and nondisclosure agreement and then laterâ?¦ your settlement check).

I would now title the post "How to make 5k a year suing collection agencies and credit bureaus for fun and profit"... subtitled: â??Suing them: if enough consumers actually sued when these companies broke the law, theyâ??d change their business practices and stay within the weak and easy consumer laws because their profit margins would depend upon complianceâ?â?¦

I will, for the entertainment of those very few who are interested, comment on my original thread:

I can understand the peanut gallery comments on what I wrote about â??assignment of debtsâ?. Ignore those please. Iâ??m guessing thatâ??s where the hazing is emanating from in the recent posts to this thread. Certainly someone who has bothered going to law school would not heckle the idea of using the concept of validation as provided by the FDCPA. Sending a letter requesting that is no big deal. Personal injury attorneys do it all the time for their clientâ??s medical bills. I wonâ??t counterattack and discuss the cases Iâ??ve seen presented by a bankâ??s in-house counsel that consisted of a one page typed note that they typed as the only proof of an account (literally 4 lines: Principle, interest, atty fees, total): no contract, no schedule of payments, no client. Easy default judgments have just become way too prevalent. For that type of legal prowess, anyone could be in-house counsel without bothering with law school.

To better put this thread into context, at the time I originally posted this thread I had just learned about the FDCPA validation requirement and was excited that there was "something", well, â??anythingâ? a consumer could request of a rogue collection agency. But, I learned of these strategies from a somewhat "fringe" source. Let's leave it at that. I find it cute that I was extremely excited to find a strategy with which to deal with collection agencies. Certainly there are errors in logic and in law. But, you donâ??t throw out the baby with the bathwater. The initial concepts presented here are off here and there, but the strategy of becoming more offensive instead of defensive, of using the FDCPA and FCRA to the consumerâ??s advantage, and of taking action instead of waiting until you get sued, are both then and now completely accurate.

Keep in mind, up until this point; most of what Iâ??d read on this board and on others of what to do when dealing with a collection agency could be summarized by the following:

â??I keep getting calls from a collection agency. I call back. I get yelled at. I donâ??t even know anything about this debt. They tell me itâ??s mine. They cuss at me. They call me 3 times a day. They tell me Iâ??m going to jail. They tell me theyâ??re taking my wages tomorrow. They tell me they donâ??t need to provide proof of anything. They tell me theyâ??ll dig up my dead husband if I donâ??t pay his funeral billâ? Or something along those lines.

And as for strategies, oh my. Most of us would simply call collection agencies, get beaten up verbally, admit a debt in writing (even when the collection agency likely had NO written proof of the debt whatsoever), try to settle, hope for a deletion on the "word" of the collection agency, get nothing in writing, and wonder oh why lord didn't the collection agency keep its word on the back end and delete the trade line after I just paid 5 times the original amount on a debt they paid .03 on the dollar for in the first place.

From flawed threads like this one, better strategies and even complaints were drafted. Suffice it to say, many peopleâ??s credit reports were corrected, and even several credit bureaus and collection agencies were successfully sued using these very strategies (validation, FDCPA violations, FCRA violations). Of course, the board, the knowledge, and the strategies did evolve over time.

I will also state that while these initial letters werenâ??t perfect, I personally used close variations of them to rid myself of several issues. So while my knowledge might not be as exact as a Harvard Law School graduate, I guess I must have sent them to even dumber people (than I am) who took them seriously and took action to correct my issues with their company.

I stand by the advice that itâ??s not normally in the consumerâ??s best interest to talk to a collection agency on the phone. You will likely say the wrong thing and honestly, who needs the stress.

 

Anybody could Update?

As for current strategy, itâ??s pretty boring and completely from the FDCPA and FCRA:

*** Donâ??t bother calling the CA. Keep a log of your actions and conversations***

1.Send a standard validation request of CA in writing (sent certified rr of course)
2.Give 31 days after receipt of letter
3.If no validation is given from CAâ?¦(or if bogus validation is given)
4.At 31 days after CA receipt, dispute with the credit bureaus if a trade line is on the report (the idea being if the CA verifies the trade line to the bureau without validating the debt to the consumer it can be construed as continued collection activity without validation: FDCPA violation. And if they can't validate the debt, why are they verifying the trade line: FCRA violation compete and accurate info)
5.See if dumb CA verifies the trade line without validating first
6.See if dumb CA continues collection activity without validating (letters, calls etc)
7.Sometime in that process, apply for local credit and get actual damages (in either denied credit or higher cost of credit/ lesser credit line)â?¦ why local credit? You want to easily be able to subpoena a bank employee in case you actually go to court. Also your file must be seen by someone other than you to count as a definition of â??fileâ? under the FCRA. Look it up if you donâ??t believe me or read the Cousins appeal.
8.Sometime in that process, read the FDCPA and FCRA many times. Get adventurous. Read a bit of case law. Find an attorney in case you later need one (good luck finding a good one who knows consumer law)
9.Look up your state laws; you may have better state laws (Go Texas!)
10.Send CA and now possibly original creditor and credit bureau a demand letter detailing all FCRA and FDCPA (and State law) violations for actual, statutory, and punitive damages, court costs, mental and emotional anguish (you get the idea). Request a full deletion of all trade lines and inquiries and an affidavit from a company officer that all the sensitive info (ssn etc) will be purged from their system in full (with the idea that, if thereâ??s no validation thereâ??s a reasonable consumer assumption that thereâ??s no debt. no debt equals no PP under FCRA, etc) and why should they then have your info on file for all to seeâ?¦ wait 31 days after receipt of demand letter.
11.File lawsuit if necessary
12.Settle or go to court (keeping in mind most cases are settled but be prepared to fight in case yours is not)

Boring, isnâ??t it. The real point is to learn the FDCPA and FCRA and your state laws and hold them accountable when they violate the law. Weâ??ve just learned that there are some sequences that tend to generate a few more violations than others.

As for the complaint, itâ??s evolved from the simple â??violations of the FCRAâ? statement to more like this (section from a credit burea lawsuit):

COUNT I
WILLFUL VIOLATION OF THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT BY CREDIT BUREAU A:
CREDIT BUREAU A violated 15 U.S.C. §1681(n) of the Act by willfully:
a) failing, in the preparation of Plaintiffâ??s reports, to follow reasonable procedures to assure the maximum possible accuracy of the information in the report;
b) failing to provide trained personnel to explain Plaintiff the information in her file, in violation of
§1681(h)(c) of the Act;
c) failing to delete incomplete, misleading and inaccurate information in Plaintiff's file after being advised of such by Plaintiff or after conducting reinvestigations, in violation of §1681(i)(a) of the Act;
d) failing to provide subsequent users of the report with the Plaintiff's statement of dispute or a summary
thereof in violation of §1681(i)(c) of the Act;
e) failing to properly advise Plaintiff of her ability to make a consumer explanation under the Act;
f) failing to properly notify, train or otherwise advise its own subscribers about purging their records of inaccurate information concerning Plaintiff;
g) failing to establish any procedure by which reinvestigation would occur immediately upon the republication by the credit grantor of the inaccurate information or by failing to have a reasonable procedure by which to immediately notify the Plaintiff that the same inaccurate information, previously deleted or disputed, was re-reported by the credit grantor;
h) failing to permanently correct Plaintiff's report after repeated notification by Plaintiff;
i) failing to properly reinvestigate Plaintiff's disputes;
and by
j) concealing from or misrepresenting facts to Plaintiff regarding her report.
19. Plaintiff is obligated to pay her attorneys a reasonable fee for their services.
20. As a direct and proximate result of CREDIT BUREAU Aâ??S willful violation of the Act, Plaintiff suffered credit denials, credit delays, financial loss, loss of use of funds, mental anguish, humiliation, a loss of reputation, the aggravation of a preexisting condition and expenditures for attorney's fees and costs. The losses are either permanent or continuing and Plaintiff will suffer the losses in the future.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment for damages against CREDIT BUREAU A for actual and punitive damages, attorney's fees and court costs, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. §1681(n).

COUNT II
VIOLATION OF 15 U.S.C. §1681(o) NEGLIGENT NON-COMPLIANCE BY CREDIT BUREAU A:

ETC ETC ETC. You get the ideaâ?¦

COUNT IX
PERMANENT INJUNCTION
102. The information contained in Plaintiff's credit files is incorrect.
103. Without permanent removal of such inaccurate information, there is no remedy at law for Plaintiff.
104. Plaintiff's damages are irreparable unless all inaccurate information is permanently changed.
105. Injunctive relief is provided by 15 U.S.C §1681.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands that the Court, mandatorily, enjoin Defendants to render Plaintiff accurate.


But then again, all this has been heartily discussed in later posts. Obviously, a CA lawsuit would include the FDCPA violations as well. Use the search function and youâ??ll find complete letters and lawsuit templates. Use them all at your own risk.