I am a co-defendant in a collections suit from a credit card bank (with which I have had an account for many years) and I have Requested for Production the following: (1) original signed contract obligating me to the entire debt (2) account history SINCE INCEPTION showing how the alleged debt was calculated They produced 2 years of statements and said they didn't need to produce anything else per 12CFR 226.25 (Truth in Lending Act / Regulation Z) which deals with record retention. Does anyone have hard experience with this? I see most validation letters requesting the above two pieces of information. Are these just meaningless requests that banks can legally disregard? Citations of actual case law would be extremely helpful in this matter. TIA, Jeff
they have to retain signed contracts/pertinent opening docs for 5-7 years depending on what exactly they have on file. it doesn't sound like they are claiming it was applied for over the telephone or on the internet so they should have SOMETHING.
"They produced 2 years of statements and said they didn't need to produce anything else per 12CFR 226.25 (Truth in Lending Act / Regulation Z) which deals with record retention." Looks like their attorney is blowing smoke. TILA is a regulatory requirement they have to follow to disclose to consumers the terms and full cost of a loan. The records retention requirement is so that they can be audited to ensure they have complied. If they could not produce those records within 2 years, they would have been in violation, an issue with their regulating agencies, probably OCC, FTC, or FDIC. You could ask on bankersonline.com Nothing prevents them from retaining record for more than 2 years. Nor do the above regulations require them to destroy records older than 2 years. We are only beginning to have regulations requiring that records be properly destroyed whenever they are, and I am not even sure those are in effect yet. The 2 years of statements, combined with the latest contract change they claim they mailed you, combined with your signature on a charge showing your card use after that contract change notification, might still bind you to those terms. Are there any particular contract terms they are trying to enforce, that were not in the original contract you signed? Is there an issue of whether you actually opened the account, or made the claimed charges, or whether the statement amounts are correct?
There are two cardholders. One is primary, guaranteeing the entire debt, the other is authorized, responsible only for her own charges. We don't have proof of which one is the primary although the bank statements indicates that cardholder A is the primary and B is the authorized user. I assume there would be something more substantive and binding for such a matter.
Re: Re: TiLA Record Retention 4 Validation Thank you for your response. That's a great site. It's nice to be able to talk to someone on the "other side of the desk." I also see a that there lot of professionals on the site who truly care about their work and aren't just pushing buttons to the detriment of consumers.
Re: Re: TiLA Record Retention 4 Validation Do the statements' indication of primary and authorized user agree with what you believe the original agreement was for? Is the bank trying to collect contrary to this? (Trying to collect the whole account from the authorized user, contrary to the designations on the statements and original agreement?) Is the issue relevent? (If primary and authorized user were you and your spouse, what difference would the distinction make?) Is this a company card, issued to an employee, on which the company failed to pay, where the bank knew, or knows that you were authorized user, but think they can treat you, in effect, as a co-signer? You might try artofcredit.com, and ask TowerRat how to respond.
Re: Re: TiLA Record Retention 4 Validation The statements disagree with what I believe but can't prove. One spouse can also take a hit and file BK if necessary. Furthermore, that spouse is responsible for the vast majority of the debt and the account usage has always reflected that (each card gets a seperate number for tracking purposes). The other spouse, whom they are claiming is the primary could otherwise pay off their portion of the debt and walk away. The bank has refused to show any proof of account ownership other than the last 2 years of credit card statements. I'll check out artofcredit and see what they say there. Thanks.
