Hello experts, Recently i checked my credit report and saw there was a collection reported by a CA for non payment of a cell phone bill. after see this I contacted the CA( looks like the classic mistake of a newbie, after reading this forum) and asked them for details, they confirmed my SSN and address and i asked about the tradeline who is the creditor and the other details briefly and old them straight away, eventhough i can't confirm the debt from the details you guys provided I can offer to pay you guys in full in return for deletion of this collection entries from the credit report. They said they can't do it only CRA's can delete the entry and i have to talk to them directly about it(Bullshit I know) and if i pay in full, they offered to report to CRA's that it is paid in full. I said i can't agree to that and the customer service rep of CA said i can dispute with CRA saying that it is not mine. Then i spoke to the OC and asked for details they said they don't have any information as the account is with the collection agency and I need to talk to them The next day i called the CA again and told the same thing the OC cannot validate the info and I'm still offering them the PFD deal i proposed yesterday and the rep said he need to review the account with his super visor and asked me to call back later. The next day i called them and he said he didn't talk to the supervisor and put me on hold for 5 min and came back and said they can't do the PFD but offered again, if it i paid in full , then they will report it as "pais in full" at this point of time the reps started the suggest me that this dragging on and this is an valid debt, you should consider this ad pay it in full and get this done with and read me the usual disclosure the information can be used against me for collecting the debt. At this point in time I asked him that i want to talk to the supervisor directly. he said his supervisor left and asked me to call back tomorrow. Now i want to ask the experts, what are my options and how do i deal with this 1). Since i spoke to them directly, did i lose the option of DV'ing them and sending them an PFD in written format. 2). Can i call the CRA and dispute them as not mine If the experts can provide me an idea of my next course of action that will be really helpful Kalatta
If you never received anything in writing from them before, they have 5 days from the initial communications to send you the written notice of your rights to dispute the debt. (If they don't send the written notice of your rights to validation within 5 days of the initial communication, they may have violated the FDCPA). Your 30-days to request a DV don't even start until AFTER you receive the validation notice. The OC had better have the alleged information about the alleged account, because the CA is required to obtain the information from the OC when you demand validation under the FDCPA. Anyone who works at the OC should be able to access the information for any account, regardless of whether or not the account has been assigned, transferred or sold to a CA; if not they wouldn't be able to provide the alleged validation of the alleged account to the CA when you demand it. This is only what I would personally do, if it were me. If you have the mailing address of the CA, I would send them a written simple validation letter (not a form letter), and you want to emphasize that the alleged original creditor can not verify any of the information which they are alleging. Two days after I would mail the validation letter. I would mail the CRAs a dispute of the alleged debt. I wouldn't want to simply dispute a not mine, because a simple not mine only needs them to confirm that they have your 2 pieces of information (name, SSN, DOB, address) and you've already said that over the phone that they've confirmed at least two pieces of that information. Search for Johnson v MBNA for more information on that piece of the puzzle. I would want to demand that the CA CONCLUSIVELY VERIFY the alleged debt from the original account documentation (which I've demanded that they obtain from the alleged original creditor in my validation letter), and not a cursory review of their computer systems. (The exact verbiage is in Johnson v. MBNA.) Now, if they verify, and don't provide the validation, then they've potentially violated the FDCPA. All letters should be sent via CMRRR so that you have proof of delivery... Or, via facsimile, where you have the facsimile transmittal verification as proof of delivery (but in my experience, they tend to forget that the facsimile machine prints a confirmation page). Of course, this is only what I would personally do from my own personal experience, I am not an attorney, I don't even play one on TV, and am not offering anything remotely resembling legal advice.
Jam Thanks for the response. Let me search for sample validation letter in the forums. In the meantime can you tell me what is the other ways i can dispute this tradeline with CRA other than it is not mine. I think the next course of action for me is 1). send a simple DV letter to CA with CMRR. 2). after 2 days dispute it with CRA Kalatta
http://consumers.creditnet.com/Discussions/credit-talk/t-what-validation-42188.html The simplest validation is something like, "I don't know who you are, and I don't have the foggiest idea what in the world you are talking about!" (In the Spears v. Brennan case, Spear's attorney uses the following validation letter. "disputes your debt collection-related allegations, denies the same, and demands strict proof and verification thereof.") The key is to make it your own! Validation serves two points (1) to make sure that you are in fact the consumer who owes the bill; and (2) that the amount of the alleged account is 100% correct without any charges that are not permissible under the law, or under the agreement which created the debt. The sample letters have laundry lists of I want to see this and that, some are valid, some are stretching it. If what documentation you are demanding to satisfy you of points (1) & (2), then you would be able to justify the request in court if the need arises. Some examples of potential types of documentation, which depends on the exact type of account: Application (1); Contract/Account Terms (2); Billing Statements (2). The key is to ask yourself does it tell me whose account it REALLY is, or does it tell me what the REAL amount of the account SHOULD be. Spears v. Brennan provides a good example of why the contract alone doesn't rise to validation. " Brennan maintains, however, that there was no violation of the FDCPA because he “sent adequate verification of the debt [to Spears] in the October 30, 1996 notice of claim.” Brief of Appellee at 13. Specifically, Brennan claims that a copy of the consumer credit contract between Spears and American General attached to the notice of claim provided sufficient verification of the debt within the meaning of 15 U.S.C. § 1692g(b). We cannot agree. The contract in no way provides sufficient verification of the debt. A review of the document reveals that it identifies only the terms of Spears’ loan, including a 17.99% annual interest rate and the original loan amount of $2,561.59. The loan agreement contains no accounting of any payments made by Spears, the dates on which those payments were made, the interest which had accrued, or any late fees which had been assessed once Spears stopped making the required payments. Indeed, the existing unpaid contract balance at the time Brennan sent the debt collection notice was at least $350.00 more than the original loan amount. Therefore, Brennan violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692g(b) when he failed to cease collection of the debt by obtaining a default judgment against Spears after Spears had notified Brennan in writing that he was disputing the debt but before Brennan had mailed verification of the debt to Spears. See footnote We reverse the trial court’s entry of summary judgment in favor of Brennan on this issue."
Jam, Thanks for the reply. eventhough it is too much information for me to digest. I'm gonna go through each and every sentence that you wrote ad try to understand as much as I can. In short I'm going to DV them and try to keep the communication writing and lets see the outcome of it. based on the outcome of DV, I'll decide on next course of action. Do you still think i need to dispute with CRA after I DV them? Kalatta
Key part of the last post, KISS - Keep It Simple S "Who are you, and what do you want? And I want to see some concrete proof of whatever you are claiming!" The purpose of the CRA dispute after DV is to do a 1-2 punch. CRA reporting is collection activity, collection activity is prohibited after they receive the DV (if it's timely), and before they've obtained and MAILED the validation. After receiving a DV, the CA can mark it "in dispute" (and are required to do so under the FDCPA and FCRA), during their next automatic update that gets sent to the CRA. That is looked at as non-activity because their systems automatically do that talking amongst themselves in the regular course of business. Responding back to a CRA dispute is a manual action on the part of the data furnisher, which rises it to the level of collection activity. This means that while responding to a DV has no time limit, the CRA dispute requires that they respond to the DV within 30 days or they must delete the trade line.
Oh, and if there is anything you want me to try to break down into smaller bites, I am more than happy to do so... When you've gotten as much practice as I have in the past 7+ years, sometimes it's easy to forget those first few months of research...
