Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: trying to figure this one out / pp You are 110% dead wrong!!!!!!!!! In order for a collection to hide behind 604 of the FCRA the have to have the 'right' to collect on a debt. If a consumer demands validation and they cannot not produce, then the pull was unlawful. I cannot name the agency because of non-disclosures, but the biggest collection agancy in the world, followed by the largest in Texas and one out of GA, each paid me $1000 plus attorneys fees!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: trying to figure this one out / pp "Furthermore even if the debt validation letter is sent after 30 days, the CA must still provide validation." -NO NOTHING requires them to....you find a case that requires them to send verification after receiving a "tardy" request. -Actually, MAHON SAYS THEY DO NOT- "The Mahons failed to request verification of the debt within thirty days following their receipt of the Notice, but when the Credit Bureau received their tardy request, it promptly verified the debt anyway, just as the statute would have required had the Mahons made a timely request." -"WOULD HAVE"-MEANING THEY DID NOT HAVE TO! "Nothing in the FDCPA says that the CA must stop its efforts to collect, but the consumer can apply the common law doctrine of estoppel by sending an estoppel letter." -NO. -ESTOPPEL REQUIRES "a duty" or requirement and as a result of not fullfilling a "duty" or "requirement", a party is harmed. -ESTOPPEL DOES NOT APPLY TO DEBT COLLECTION CASES. - SHOW ME CASES THAT SAY IM WRONG "An estoppel letter is the equivalent of telling a CA to shit or get off the pot. The purpose is to inform the CA that the CA's actions are forcing the consumer into a position where the consumer has no other recourse than to resort to the courts to attempt resolve the dispute and that should they persist in their actions and get sued, and any future filings will probably be construed by the courts to have been in good faith. Nothing more, nothing less. " -Though this was an "intent to sue letter" ?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: trying to figure this one out / pp --Was this a settlement or was it an AWARD after trial? --Settlements TO NOT ESTABLISH FACTS OR LAW. I could sue Pepsi cause I dont like the color of their soda......the fact they would pay me $1000.00 to dismiss the case does not make them have to change the color, or even address it!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: trying to figure this one out / ***************************************** I totally agree, some of your points were the same ones I have tried to make clear on other posts. I see your reasoning, just to clarify this whole issue does a CA after the SOL have a pp to pull the consumers report if they already have their current address ?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: trying to figure this one out / Yes.... the only requirement is that is it in connection with the "collection of a debt"
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: trying to figure this one out / LK & hiding I see you both have ben buzy since Ive been gone. where is this issue going? bottom line so there is no more arguing... LK do you have any cases you can cite in relation to your opinion in this matter ? hiding do you see any reason to entice or provoke LK anymore? I want to resolve this issue since I am confused now, and possibly others on here Ill ask my attorney who should know the correct answer and post it. case law vs enforcement I would hate to be in the same class as you guys the debate with be time consuming and the teacher would probably loose their patience lol!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: trying to figure this one out / you're not the boss of us! I agree..I will wait..plus I kept LK past his bedtime
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: trying to figure this one out / Collection doesn't stand alone as a permissable purpose. Sassy
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: trying to figure this one out / for a "collection agency" it is does LOL I am curious on your take on this Sassy?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: trying to figure this one ou Lk i was referring to case law regarding my CA issue not this 24 year old case you 2 are arguing about the PP cases you are suing for do u have case law for those? GRRRR I need case law to present in small claims court, If I was going the Fed route I would avoid this arguement as I would have my attorney doing the work, can you find one for me plz...?? and soon ! I want to get educated properly !
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: trying to figure this one ou Nope, there's no exception listed for a collection agency. My take, been there -- done this!!!!!! It isn't a debate and it isn't even a discussion. You think you are right and no matter how many post otherwise you won't bend because you can't be objective; you don't consider anything other than what you've already decided. It will go on and on until everyone decides it isn't worth the energy trying to communicate with you -- then, you'll start a new thread or post to a thread, declaring all that you have said in this thread is a fact. Those that want the real answers will do their own homework, search the archives where they are, confirm them and not ask. Then you can post whatever you like, as often as you like Sassy
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: trying to figure this one ou on second thought...nevermind
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: trying to figure this one ou Basically it all boils down to whether or not the CA can either prove their position. If the CA can prove they had a valid debt after discovery, fine, the consumer dismisses their action. Send a C&D and move on. If they cannot prove their position, and the validation request was sent 30 days after the initial communication, well you just have to amend your complaint to where they violated the following statutes: A debt collector may not use unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect any debt. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of this section: (1) The collection of any amount (including any interest, fee, charge, or expense incidental to the principal obligation) unless such amount is expressly authorized by the agreement creating the debt or permitted by law. (2) The false representation of -- (A) the character, amount, or legal status of any debt; hiding90, show me one bit of case law wherein a consumer got hit with attorney fees after pursuing a CA for any type of collection where the CA remained silent about the debt?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: trying to figure this one ou Dixie, You aren't buying into the validation only has to be provided if requested within the initial 30-days are ya? Sassy
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: trying to figure this one ou I'm to where I believe that if a consumer requests validation after 30 days from initial communication, then continued collection efforts are not actionable under the FDCPA. That is not to say if the debt is not yours, or soemthing is wrong about the way it is being reported you cannot sue the debt collector.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: trying to figure this one ou ok thanks, flying with ya there. Sassy
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: trying to figure this one ou Case for LK... Lusk v. TRW, Inc., No. 97-4127, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT, February 4, 1999, Filed "Third, FAB had a permissible purpose for requesting Lusk's credit report--collection of money possibly due Lusk's landlord for damage in Lusk's apartment. See 15 U.S.C. § 1681b(3)(A) (current version at 15 U.S.C.A. § 1681b(a)(3)(A) (West 1998)). Lusk cited to no controlling authority for his proposition that a collection agency ceases to have a permissible purpose for requesting a credit [*4] report after a debtor contests the debt in writing." IF THIS ISNT CLOSE....I DONT KNOW WHAT IS!!!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: trying to figure this on You said it, you don't know what is! That isn't a case, it's a snippet from the appeal that gives no details or context as to what the case and arguments were or weren't. All that out of context snippet says is that Lusk cited no controlling authority -- doesn't mean there isn't one, means Lusk didn't do it. And, it certainly doesn't address the issue one way or another of whether a permissable purpose exists. You noticed my psychic accuracy, btw, from this same thread, above: Now there's this thread (the fact posting as predicted) from today: http://consumers.creditnet.com/straighttalk/board/showthread.php?s=&postid=418622#post418622 And this thread (the posting to an existing thread as if your position is factual) from today as well: http://consumers.creditnet.com/straighttalk/board/showthread.php?s=&postid=418613#post418613 Sassy
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: trying to figure this on actually Lk I was the one that was waiting for the answer from my attorney since I am so confused now. I asked him about being able to collect a debt forever even outside the SOL and I asked him If a consumer has any recourse if a CA or creditor pulls your report after this time.if its still considered PP ? still waiting to hear back. funny thing is today I recvd a letter from a Ca that just purchased an old debt of mine from 1998 for an old car loan that was totalled in an accident. it went del back in 10/98 no pay since and wasnt c/o until 7/99. I requested validation within my intital 30 days they gave me partial, then I sent them a letter advising them to not contact me any further under the FDCPA wasnt actually a formal c& d I think it was close enough they are still contacting me .. was my letter enough or did it have to actually say c & D ???? Ill post my attorneys reply about the creditor/Ca pull as soon as I know. okay
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: trying to figure this on It goes by the least sofisticated consumer standard. Basically, if you tell a CA not to contact you anymore in relation to a debt, they must cease and decist with a few exceptions.
