Slick CA's

That depends upon what they have in their computers.

A document showing that you signed to be responsible for the alleged debt does not constitute validation of the debt. It mereley shows who the original creditor was, the amount of the original debt and the date that the agreement was signed by one or both parties. It does not constitute validation.

It says that the debt must be validated and in your hands within a reasonable period of time which is usually considered by the courts to be 30 days.

NO.

There is an estoppel letter in the sample letters section of this board. You might want to try that.

 

I can assure you that what they sent you is not proper validation. I would also like to warn you that they may try to avoid validation due to what they may understand about HIPAA and the patient privacy laws under HIPAA. Some collectors refuse to validate due to HIPAA but they are totally off the wall and out to lunch when they do that because there is no conflict whatever between HIPAA and FDCPA and there are specific rules about that in HIPAA stating that they can have access to certain medical records for collection enforcement purposes.

If they refuse to validation using HIPAA as their excuse they violate FDCPA and HIPAA is not a remedy.

I would simply refuse to pay and be done with it.

However you must be careful that you do not state that you refuse to pay because the net effect of that is exactly the same as if you had sent them a cease & desist. Its law suit time and you will not be the plaintiff.

 

Re: Re: Slick CA's

1*Well it certainly isn't what they sent you!
2*Correct.
CAs are great time wasters-much to our advantage.
The END ************************* LB 59

They like to fiddle while their rome burns:
That's ok by me.Let them feel the heat.

 

Re: Re: Slick CA's

So, brown, do you have a lot of collections so that you can watch their rome burning?

 

Actually, as of Wednesday, March 5th, 2003 at approximately 9:10 P.M. I have come up with a brand new hitch to put in their git-along.

I'm gonna quit bugging these idiots with references to FDCPA in estoppel any more and let them figure out this new twist.

I'm going to try it in estoppel first and if it seems to increase the efficiency of estoppel then I will extend it to all the rest of my series of letters.

Sure wish I could come up with a different twist to get rid of that stupid Englehardt v. Gravens BS.

 

Re: Re: Slick CA's

But what WOULD be proper validation for a medical debt? I don't understand at all. I know this gets discussed ad nauseum around here, but I've onlyer heard responses about what is NOT validation. We can get that from the infamous Wollman letter and Spears v. Brennan.

If you are given an itemization of a (for this example) hospital bill (something directly from the hospital), along with an admissions form with your signature, isn't that validation? If not, why isn't it?

Is there any level of proof high enough to constitute validation? At what point would a judge tell you you're insane for trying to claim that something isn't proper validation?

 

Re: Re: Slick CA's

Forget the stupid credit reports!

Take care of your problems and the stupid credit reports will pretty well take care of themselves.

One does need to monitor them as closely as possible for errors but the reason for monitoring them is to catch errors and violations and not to worry about what the score is in the first place. That should only be used as a gauge to see how much good you are doing each time you make a move. Nothing will do the heart more good than to nail a CA to the wall and watch the credit score move.

The plan should be to make the credit score move up to whatever it will by getting rid of the collectors and forcing them to pay it off so one does not get a judgment against them in the first place and then taking it off one's credit report as well.

In the meantime, one should be working on positive means to cure whatever it is that caused the problem in the first place. If that is lack of income then that needs to be addressed by whatever means necessary even though it might mean gathering up cow pies and making wall clocks out of them or gathering tumbleweeds and turning them into christmas trees or whatever.
There are millions of ways to make money and all it takes is a bit of ingenuity and a lot of hard work.

It makes no difference what the problem is, do something besides just complain about how hard life is these days. (And no, I'm not just picking on you when I say that)

The next step is to do something positive about your credit and needless to say credit cards are not the way to build good credit. Yes, one does need some credit cards but they should be your secondary focus because good bank credit cards are harder to come by than the subprimes. So use a concentrated plan of action that will get you there. Go for bank credit cards not the stupid Crap one, Crap two, Crap three junk.

You will also need a couple of the instore retailers cards too, but not more than a couple or so.

Then you will obviously need vehicle loans over time and quite possibly home loans.

Whatever. Right now what you need is a solid plan of action that will take care of your debt problem(s).

Then as to your original question, your need to demand a validation which you have already done and obviously didn't get. So don't make the mistake that many have done and continue to do which is to keep on demanding that which you did not want in the first place.

Your next move should probably be the dumb estoppel letter in the letters section of this board.
It may work and it may not but you need to keep on pushing them until you have them in a noose and standing on a foot stool and then kick the foot stool out from under them.

 

Re: Re: Slick CA's

I think it would be.

Of course there is. Everything has to be judged from a standard of reasonabiltiy.

The answer to that can vary from courtroom to courtroom and that is a very good reason to stay as far away from them as possible. I guarantee you that better relief is to be found in an outhouse than in a courthouse.

So then it is obviously not so much a question of what constitutes a proper validation as it is a question of what constitutes proper relief if and when you get the durn thing. In otherwords, that may be the predicament the original poster may have found herself in if she had not found this or some other good board.

Her answer was to just pay up the best way she could in terms of arrangements. But I am like the little frog in the cartoon. He may have his head in the bird's beak all ready to get swollowed but he has his little paws tightly around the bird's neck. Now what is the bird going to do?
He has to let go or he is going to choke to death.