I had a check I wrote for a pizza returned a couple years ago that I didn't even know about. I called the CA today and offered to pay the full balance of 77 dollars in exchange for deletion. They adamantly refused so I said I'm not paying. My question is, should I validate or just pay it and then nutcase them? My concern is that since this is a returned check they could come after me if they wanted to. Any suggestions? It is a local CA and local pizza joint so validation might be easy, however I called the pizza place today and he said they didn't have records that far back. I'm not sure if that means they have been turned over to the CA or not.
$77 worth of pizza - must have been a heck of a party LOL!!! That was a joke Go ahead and validate. Worse case they do, and you are where you are now. Best case, they will screw up somewhere and you will have them on violations to sue them into deletion. Don't forget to dispute it on your CR when you receive the green card back. This is the best setup (IMHO) to set them up for a violation.
so is the rationale here that you validate with the CA and then dispute with the CRA's and then the CA screws up by continuing collection activity while the item is in dispute with the CRA's? How are you able to prove that the CA was continuing collection activity?
The first step in any returned check case is always make Em cough up the original check. They have to do that or they can't collect.
So it sounds as if validation is the best bet here. If I recieve a photocopy of the check should I consider that to be sufficient? Also, what if I offered to pay in full in exchange for the original check back and then do a validation when I have the check?
Re: Re: Returned check collections If I receive a photocopy of the check should I consider that to be sufficient? timmyq ===================== How would you know if the copy was made off of the orig. check or copied from a forgery? The END ************************* LB 59 PS: How many copies are you prepaired to pay the 77 on 2 5 12 or what? There can only be one original check.
Re: Re: Returned check collections Sending more collection letters before validating, phone calls to you, verifying with the CRA but not validating with you, failing to mark the TL in dispute, are many of the ways. While LB has a point about the fraudulent copy he got, I'm not so sure they have to send you the original check until you pay for it. That is their only evidence if they decide to file with the D.A.
Re: Re: Re: Returned check collections Exactly GEORGE. I got hit for 75 dollars for 5 returned checks. I demanded copies before paying. Two of the copies were of the same check number but for different amounts. All five of the copies were forgeries. How do I know that? I still have the original blank unissued checks. Since that happened I made another rule. Don't ever pay returned check fees.
Re: Re: Re: Returned check collections 1*While LB has a point about the fraudulent copy he got, I'm not so sure they have to send you the original check until you pay for it. 2*That is their only evidence if they decide to file with the D.A. j lynn | ================ 1*When they try to collect on forged copies how can you trust them to send you the orig.after you pay?? 2*IF they can show the Orig. to The DA they can show it to me. In my case how far would the DA have gotten in coming after me with fraudulent copies?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Returned check coll Good Point LB. The original poster stated earlier that this is a local collection agency. Since they're local, you should be able to arrange to go to their office to see the original stating that you don't remember the check, and the copy they sent you didn't look right. At least you'll get to see if they have the original. Then you can just pay, get the original check back, then after a few months bash them with repeated disputes, make them mess up, and threaten to sue for deletion. If they have the original check in their posession, you can't hardly win in court, but once you've paid them, and gotten the original check back if you do sue, they will produce a photocopy of the original check which you can claim isn't the actual check. Don't sign anything with them stating that you agree that you owed the debt. Perhaps if they agree to let you come in to "see" the original check, have the cash with you to pay it off, and take the original with you right then. Just a thought. ChrisB
Re: Re: Re: Returned check collecti Can you insist that since the copy may be a forgery, that they copy the original check, and on the copy have it notarized stating that it is an exact copy of the original check that the notary sees? No notary would risk criminal prosecution by notarizing something that way without actually examining the original check. Give them exact verbage to copy with the check to have the top half of the paper notarized. Because I agree with jlynn that most collection agencies won't want to give up their evidince to you without having the payment in hand first. This way you're requesting true validation with a notarized copy of the original check, you can then send a "not mine" to the CRA after they've gotten your request, then if within the month they haven't provided you with the notarized copy, and they still report it you have ammo to sue them EVEN if they have the original. Just a thought. ChrisB I state that the original of the check copied below was presented to me on the ______ of _____ 20___ and that the copy below is identical to the original check. ____________________________ Signature, Notary Public, State of XXXXXXX ___________________ ________________________ My Commission Expires Typed/Printed Name of Notary Seal:
Re: Re: Returned check collections My concern is that since this is a returned check they could come after me if they wanted to timmyq ================= If they do they D well better have the original check in hand. The END ************************* LB 59
Re: Re: Returned check collections Once you've paid them, and gotten the original check back chrisb =============== I still never pay returned check fees. The only thing I will consider paying is a NSF only if it's properly documented and then only if the funds weren't on deposit.
