Hereâ??s a copy of the response to my validation request: Macdowell & Associates Attorney at Law Re: Cottonwood Financial Services LLC. Our File No. 034818 Dear Mrs. Harris I am advising you that the original creditor in this case is Providian National Bank. I show you opened a credit card/account agreement on 05/26/99 card no XXXX_XXXX_XXXX. The statue does not run from the date you opened the account. Instead, it runs from the date of your last payment. My records reflect that an initial demand letter in compliance with the FDCPA was sent to you on 03/21/03. The subsequent contact with this firm has resulted in your verification of the debt. You have further verified the debt by making payments directly to this firm toward that debt. This further tolls the statue. If a lawsuit is filed, the court may award a judgment as high as $1766,17 minus $200 credit that you are due. I can offer a one time lump sum payment of $650.00 or interest free payments on $800.00 in order to resolve this litigation. Please contact me in regard to a reasonable settlement. Thank you for your time. How should I respond to this? I know I was stupid to let them scare me into making a couple of payments. I have since closed that bank account. I was curious about something. If Providian is the original creditor who they are representing, then who is Cottonwood Financial? I called Providian on yesterday. They said that they sold the account to New Century. I called New Century and they said that they sold it to Cottonwood Financial. I called Cottonwood Financial and guess what? Itâ??s the same number to Macdowell and Associates. I clearly asked them if they owned the account. The first contact with them over the phone they clearly stated that they referred to Providian as their client. Does this sound strange to anyone? When I sent the validation request, I also sent a partial C&D letter and they still continue to phone me. Advice anyone?
I am new to the board, but if thats what they sent you in response to your request for validation, you may want to reply as soon as possible. In your 2nd reply/dispute letter make it clear "that you requested validation and verification" of the alleged debt and that per the FDCPA they are required to provide it within 30 days of receipt of your letter of dispute. Also you may want to make it clear that their opinions and unverified statement(s) are un-exceptable and do not constitue validation or compliance with FDCPA. What you received could best be referred to as Slam Response. All the Att/D.C. is doing restating information obtained when he/she purchased the alleged debt and this IS NOT Validation or Verification of the alleged debt. If they sent their response through certified mail, make sure you reference the tracking number from the receipt. Should the D.C. later claim they sent verfication and try to use the certified mail reciept as proof, you can show a judge (if neccessary) that the mail the D.C. is referring to did not comply or provide validation of the alleged debt and that you responded to the mailing informing the D.C. of this fact. ProSub
