Thinking out loud...

Discussion in 'Credit Talk' started by Velouria, Sep 22, 2002.

  1. Velouria

    Velouria Well-Known Member

    When a CA or CRA sends you validation by mail...do they usually send it CRRR? Speaking hypothetically, if a person sends CA a dispute, and the CA properly validates it, wouldn't the CA be causing trouble for themselves by NOT sending it CRRR???
     
  2. LKH

    LKH Well-Known Member

    Possibly. Most ca's will NOT send anything. But when they do, it is usually regular mail, which means they have no valid proof they sent it. And, depending on who the judge may be, if that's what you are heading to, they may or may not take the word of the ca that they mailed it. All you have to do is deny ever receiving anything. (depending upon your own moral standards, of course)
     
  3. keepmine

    keepmine Well-Known Member

    Generally speaking, a judge will accept the CA's word that they mailed the validation. If they are able to produce it in court the judge will infer since it was in the ca's best interest to send it to you, it's reasonable to assume they did so. There is no FDCPA requirment that it be sent registered and, stuff does get lost in the mail.
     
  4. tnobles

    tnobles Well-Known Member

    On that note, they could say they sent you something but never really did? So where are you left then?
     
  5. keepmine

    keepmine Well-Known Member

    If they can produce it for the judge, they probably get the benefit of the doubt.
     
  6. tnobles

    tnobles Well-Known Member

    Let's say theoretically you send validation request, they want to be jerks and ignore it, you sue, 4 months later you go to court, they say they sent it, (keep in mind now they have had 4 months) the judge is going to assume they sent it? that sucks.
     
  7. LKH

    LKH Well-Known Member

    I think a ca would only claim to have sent it if they have the actual validation in their possession. If they claimed they sent it, but really didn't, then the judge says let's see it. If they don't have proper validation at that time, they are sunk. So I would doubt that most ca's would make a claim like that if they don't have the proof. Unless of course, they are 100% idiot instead of just the usual 50%.
     
  8. tnobles

    tnobles Well-Known Member

    But what I was saying was you have now given them the extra '4' months to do it. I am not arguing I am just saying that sucks, especially for people out there that respond to their initial 30 day notice, ask for the validation as they were told to do, don't recieve it and think that they are just stuck. As for me, before I started to check out this forum, and I actually responded to that '30 day notice' I would have been none the wiser had they not sent me the validation. I would have just assumed that they had the info, and I was required to pay it. Call me dumb but I think that I am the 'average consumer'. By the way LKH I believe some of them are just that dumb b/c they don't expect the 'average consumer' to know their rights/much less expect them to sue.
     
  9. Velouria

    Velouria Well-Known Member

    It's ironic that when people forget to send their validation requests CRRR, the CA/CRA will often claim they "never recieved it". So if the situation were reversed, would a court take the consumer's word that the CA/CRA failed to investigate? BTW, I'm not in a lawsuit situation (knock on wood), I was just curious.
     
  10. QUEEN_BEE

    QUEEN_BEE Well-Known Member

    But anyone can type up a letter and date it for when it should have been written and mailed. Ughh.
     

Share This Page