I have a charged off Spiegel account that has been sent to several different CA's. The 1st CA sent me a letter in 12/01 requesting payment. I sent a dispute letter asking for validation. I never received a response & no other collection letters. A 2nd CA sent me a letter in 3/02 requesting payment. I again sent a dispute letter & asked for validation. I did not receive a response from this CA either & no other collection letters. A 3rd CA has recently sent me a letter requesting payment. Would it be beneficial to point out in the validation letter to the 3rd CA, that all other CA that have contacted me have never been able to validate? (I don't know that they can't but, they have chosen not to). The only difference that I see with this CA is that their letter says that they have "purchased records from Spiegel reflecting that I owe this debt". Thanks in advance!
Send them the validation letter. The only records they purchased was a piece of paper with your name. They don't have the contract, all the statements, etc. Make them validate and make them show you where they got this information from. Just a few questions: #1 What is the DOLA on the Original Spiegel account? #2 What is your state's SOL #3 How is this reporting on your reports?
Geez. Just send the validation letter. If the 1st 2 couldn't validate, these bozos probably can't either. Why would you "purchase" records from a company that hires you to collect its debt? That seems danged silly.
you already have them on continuing collection efforts because they are held to the same bar from the validation you sent the 1st collection agency... so they have already violated the FDCPA, send them an estoppel... or intent to sue... dont even waste time with a validation.. kev
The DOLA shows as 5/2000. I'm in CA, so the SOL is 4 years & it is being reported like this: FCNB-Spiegel Profit and Loss Writeoff Updated 01/2001 Balance $3268 Opened 03/1997 Most Owed $3335 Closed 05/2000 Past Due $748 Status As Of 5/2000: Charged Off As Bad Debt Thanks again for your input. I'll post if they verify or not.
I would still send them a validation letter. Incase if you ever decide to SUE them you will have all the proof. I sent a validation letter out 24 days ago. I recieved yesterday a Collection letter. lol. another violation. Im up to 5 now. another 5 days and it will be 6.
LOL, You're right Tom, it does seem silly. Interestingly though, some of these newer contracts say that if we (the OC) have to dig through our old files (often called Fire Proof) to find validation information we (the OC) will charge a small search charge to the CA. This is especially true of Medical Providers. The relationship between OC and CA is becoming gradually more antagonistic. What has apparently happened is that this provision is included in ALL the contracts this particular OC has with CA's. So when CA#1 got the Val Demand, instead of paying for a records search they just sent the file BACK to the OC as uncollectible. OC THEN hires CA#2, same thing. And now 3. The OC is guilty of numerous provisions of the UDAP Act and the FCRA for not performing a proper investigation. If a CA stops collection activity and transmits directly to a subsequent CA, THAT is continued collection activity in the face of an un validated debt. KustomKat beautifully points out in his/her post: you already have them on continuing collection efforts because they are held to the same bar from the validation you sent the 1st collection agency... (But I don't think that's what's been happening here). Ya gotta luv these people, NOT!
Let me understand this correctly, if OC sends account to CA1, you validate. CA1 does not respond and you get another letter from CA2, then CA1 is continuing its collection activity???? Who is at fault, CA1 or the OC or both CA1 and the OC. In my case Providian sent to Encore, who sent me collection letter, I sent Encore validation letter. Never heard from them. But, I did get signed shortformed contract plus all account statements in the mail from Providian, NOT Encore. I just received letter from RMA about Providain account and my EQ report is showing CONSUMER DISPUTE AFTER RESOLUTION. Is Encore quilty of continued collection activity?
Now all that said, I bet if you look into it, Encore, upon realizing they were not gonna collect anything SOLD the acct. (as opposed to assigning it) to an unsuspecting RMA. RMA probably has no idea this acct is under a demand for validation. Encore figures, what the heck, might as well sell the acct to the next guy, (without telling them of the problem) and make at least a few dollars on it. Would they do that? YOU BET THEY WOULD! That's how these people operate. I'm working on a letter to subsequent CA's suggesting they return the acct back to where they got it and demand their money back, since this account is FROZEN by a demand for val. and they would be operating illegally if they attempt to collect, OR put it on your CR.
Butch, Thanks for the info. In my case, I should send an estoppel to Encore, saying they did not validate, not saying I got statements and contract directly from Providian. RMA has until 9/27 to respond to vialdation letter. After that I should send them a letter basically, you did not respond and if you bought from Encore you are in violation of continued collection acttivity. Thoughts?
The notation on my CR is after RMA got my validation letter not from Enocre. I know this makes a difference, but not just sure how right now.
Butch, is there any method by which you can determine if the debt was resold by the CA as opposed to having been sent back to the OC and then sold to this 2nd CA?
