OC vs. CA listings

You say there is no listing for CA yet but that you validated without response.

Who did you validate with?

It is a CA listing sold/transferred -- as in the tradeline is going on a 2nd or 3rd CA from the original?

Sassy

 

Sassy,

That is exactly what I am dealing with, it is the 7 or 8 CA that has tried to collect on a debt from '98.

Every time I ask for validation they sell the debt to another CA. This last one is reporting it as a "new collection".

Since you asked if that is the case. how should that be handled ?

JohnM

 

No., validation is under the FDCPA and only applies to third-party collectors. Though you can hold the OC responsible for the actions of it's CA's.

The CA's are required to obtain the validation materials from the OC (source) and forward it to you. The point is they have no original knowledge of the debt so their records could be in error.

Have you disputed the OC listings with the CRA's? A lot of times those tradelines will be deleted because they have no interest anymore.

OK, you requested validation of a CA before they (the CA) ever listed anything on your report. They did not provide validation but then reported the tradeline?

If you requested validation prior to the CA's having reported, they shouldn't report at all until they provide validation. An alternative to providing the validation is to cease collection activities.

Reporting and continued reporting are continued collection activities per an FTC opinion letter.

Sassy

 

JohnM,

LizardKing responded some time ago, I'll see if I can find the post, that the original request for validation binds subsequent CA's to the request.

I think I would contact the OC's and let them know they can be held responsible for the actions of the CA's in their failure to validate and then passing the buck. The OC has to provide the information to the CA's to be forwarded to you, so if their was information they are the ones that would or should have had it.

My understanding is that the debt buyers are buying contact information and usually minimal contact information. If the source documentation is required, they can obtain it, but usually their are additional charges associated with the retrieval.

Most I believe handle it by requesting validation and disputing each time a new listing comes up. Though that can get old fast depending on how far you are into the 7 year reporting period.

I'm wondering if there's not some way to use the reasonable procedures required of the CRA's themselves to assist in this. Most of the tradeline information stays the same with each passing, or should, the account number and name is all that changes.

You could try a letter citing this:

Howard v Recovery Consultant, Inc.
CaseNo. 88 SCI ((Muni Ct Lorain Co, 5-26-8
Judge Ewers
Type Decision
PIF 979

The failure of a debt collection agency to verify the validity of a debt when requested by a consumer before closing and returning the account to the creditor is an unconscionable practice which violates R.C. 1345.03

Here's the LizardKing I was thinking of, though it looks like Kev responded with what I am remembering:
http://consumers.creditnet.com/straighttalk/board/showthread.php?threadid=19637

Here's what mindcrime did in a similar situation, from this thread:
http://consumers.creditnet.com/straighttalk/board/showthread.php?threadid=25235

Posted by mindcrime2 on 05.12.2002 15:11

Re: Transferred Collection Account

quote:
------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Trade4Livn

A collection agency (United Recovery Systems) sent me a letter back in January for collections on an account that is not mine. I sent a validation letter to which I received no response. Today, I get a letter from Academy Collection Service telling me that this account has been transferred to them for collections. Isn't it a violation of the FDCPA for a CA to transfer an account to another CA or back to the OC to transfer to another CA without validating the first time? What are my next steps besides sending a validation letter to Academy? Should I also write the first CA?
------------------------------------------------------------

I was in a similar situation. After I sent a validation request to the first CA, the first CA sent me a letter saying they were "in the process of obtaining validation". Weeks went by, heard nothing. Then I get a collection letter from another CA. So... instead of playing games with the validation request again, I went straight for the estoppel letter, made copies of previous validation letter, signed green card, and letter from the 1st CA, and basically told the 2nd CA I'm noy playing games and they need to drop this. They did. And shortly after I received a letter from the OC (through the 1st CA I believe) that said they were sorry for billing me for something I never ordered/received, and they are closing the matter.

So, my short answer is, advise the 2nd CA you have proof of requesting validation (over 30 days ago) and continued collection activity (such as sending you a collection letter) is a violation of the FDCPA, and you're sueing them for it. If it's a relatively small debt (mine was), they'll go away.
~mindcrime~

OC's responsible for CA's actions (though there's a "knowing" provision -- they'd know if you wrote a letter however ;-)
http://consumers.creditnet.com/straighttalk/board/showthread.php?threadid=22079

Sassy

 

[color=35007]just to add,
Here is what I did. It worked with two oc s . First I sent a dispute to the cras, next day sent the following letter.


Voodochild
His address
Super Debtville, Ca xxxxxx

Wells Fargo Bank
PO BOX 3696
Portland, OR 97208

June 11, 2002

RE: Account # xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Dear Sir or Madame

I have recently received a copy of my credit reports. All three reports had an account listed from your company as a credit card. I have disputed the account with the credit bureau as â??not mineâ?. After a very negative experience with NCO Financial Systems, I am hoping that Wells Fargo will show some due consideration in this matter. NCO claimed they had bought this account from Wells Fargo. I argued it was not my debt. We consequently settled the matter(they deleted when they couldn't validate). I still maintain that it was not my debt. Due to the questionable nature of the debt and the fact that Wells Fargo sold it to NCO, I submit the following.

Please delete your information from my credit reports. I have never had an account with your company. If someone has opened an account in my name, please close it immediately before further harm is done.

I am requesting that you notify all of credit bureaus that this account is â??disputedâ? or that you delete this account until this matter is resolved. This is required by the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

If there is any paperwork that I need to sign to confirm that this account is not mine, please send me the required documents.

This is a written dispute of the this account per the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Fair Credit Billing Act. Please be aware that I am exercising all of my rights per these laws and all other applicable laws protecting me.


Sincerely,


Mr. Voodochild!
[/color]

 

OR you can wait a few minutes and have voodoo child cut and paste from the other current thread on the same subject.

LOL LOL, thank you voodoo child.

Sassy

 

[color=35007]Hey, I am a voodoCHILD I love to play with paste. and colors[/color]

 

Sassy and Voodo,

Thanks,

JohnM

 

Well JP, hmmmmm,

You could request the specific procedures used to verify from the CRA. They are supposed to provide them within 15 days, they won't but it will add to the violation stack.

You could contact the OC again with copies of all of your correspondence to the CA, saying they haven't responded and reminding them of their liability for the actions of the CA.

You could write to the CRA with the "consumer disputes" notation for 6 weeks telling them their time for verification has been over -- delete.

You could dispute them all again, the CA's, saying you requested validation and it wasn't provided.

You could definitely dispute the OC's again as they obviously aren't willing to verify.

You could send the prove it or remove it letter -- though why bother, you've sent enough letters, those CA's aren't going to respond.

You could try an intent to sue letter or you could just go ahead with or without the small claims form attached.

I've had some that I sent letters to, both OC's and CA's, that didn't respond at all (the usual response) and a few that responded with partial validation. Then I disputed again and they came off.

My cycle though is to send a letter and once the green card is received, initiate a dispute. That isn't everyone's cycle -- for instance, I believe Doc dealt strictly with the creditors.

The important thing, is to have a plan and work it; persistance is the overall key.

You really don't want the CA's to respond and if you've sent the estoppel they could very well not respond to another CRA dispute. I'd try disputing with the CRA again.

An alternative to providing the validation is to cease collecting. If they don't respond to a dispute, they aren't collecting and the tradeline is gone.

You could do all of the above or none of the above. I think though, if you've sent the estoppel threatening legal action, you should follow on that path -- dispute again then either file in small claims or send an intent to sue or a final notice before filing a claim or just go ahead and file a suit.

Sassy

 

Thanks for this thread guys (and thanks for all the good ideas, sassy)

I'm in the exact same boat with not hearing from the OCs and the CAs even after sending estoppel letters.