Validation Question

Discussion in 'Credit Talk' started by Hal, Aug 22, 2001.

  1. Hal

    Hal Well-Known Member

    Response to a validation letter from Assett Acceptance:

    Thank you for your request for validation of your Target account. Enclosed is computer printout of information given to us by the previous creditor. Please contact me so we can work toward resolving this matter.


    Joe Collector

    Attached: Computer Printout - Screen print of their collections screen. Name, SSN, Target acct #, My various personal info. Principal bal + interest.

    In my opinion, this is not a sufficient validation and did not include any of the info requested on the attachement to the LK Validation letter.

    Anyone have suggestions on how to follow up on this?

    Thanks in advance.
  2. roni

    roni Well-Known Member

    Just my opinion, but I would call them... and say the same thing the letter does.... you're not disputing the information in the computer records, but that it is yours. You have xx days remaining to comply with my request or under the FCRA you have to delete the tradeline.

    I get the feeling that they know it.... That is why they want to discuss it vs. a request as to when they can expect full payment.
  3. Hal

    Hal Well-Known Member

    My letter had much the same wording..."no computer printout...signed application...etc."

    Yet this is the response I received.
  4. roni

    roni Well-Known Member

    If you have the signature information in your letter, don't accept anything less.... Computer printouts do not prove the original debt, but just that it in a record that exists in their computer files. A carefully lettered Validation request removes their option to provide computer records as evidence.
  5. Hal

    Hal Well-Known Member


    HI again! If anyone can give me some suggestions on what steps to take next I would greatly appreciate it.

    I read this forum every day, and have learned a lot and appreciate everyone's participation. I post infrequently, and hope I have never posted anything to offend just seems when I post a question, I get few if any responses. I am trying to prepare to buy a home....any help would really be appreciated.
  6. akg

    akg Well-Known Member

    Hi Hal,

    Which Asset Acceptance Office sent you the computer printout? From my understanding, they have offices in MI, OH and FL.

    I sent this same CA a validation letter on August 15th. I received the signed certified mail r/r card in the mail yesterday. Did you send your validation letter r/r? Can you post the content of the letter you sent to them?

    Have you disputed the derog on your credit report yet? I disputed the CA derog with TransUnion and Experian --- for some reason it doesn't look like they reported to Equifax (at least not yet). The entry has come back as "verified" with Experian. No word on TU yet. I'm going to wait for the results of the CRA disputes and give them 30 days to respond to my validation letter before I respond. They have also reaged my debt. Did this happen to you?

    I was very specific in my validation request. I will post here and let you know the results once I hear back from them.
  7. Candi

    Candi Well-Known Member

    I feel the same way as you about getting few responses to questions. It's like a family here and were the in-laws. lol. Anyway I would send another letter re-stating the fact that "YOU ARE NOT DISPUTING THAT THEY HAVE YOUR INFORMATION IN THEIR COMPUTER, YOU ARE DISPUTING THAT IT IS ACTUALLY YOURS." I would give them less time to respond then the first request. As stated earlier if your not disputing with the cra's, start that now. Sorry I'm not a real expert at this but thats what I would do. Good luck.
  8. chelechele

    chelechele Well-Known Member

    HEY :) Look under Andrew's post about unvalidated entry by CA...there is a really good letter there!! :)
  9. Hal

    Hal Well-Known Member

    The letter in Andrew's post is exactly the one I sent to them, certified mail/RR. The computer printout was on Assett Acceptance letterhead from their MI office and looked like a screen print of the information on their system.

    I was hoping someone had some sort of follow up letter that was well worded saying they did not provide the correct validation info as required etc..
  10. chelechele

    chelechele Well-Known Member

    I'm confused...the letter you sent originally was the same letter under Andrew's post....hmmm lemmie see...
  11. chelechele

    chelechele Well-Known Member

    These are Dave's letter 1 and letter 2 from an earlier post...maybe this will help....he and lizard have the goods.....

    Posted by Dave:

    here's letter 1 and letter 2. I hope they help you.

    Dear Sir or Madam:

    I am in receipt of two separate mailings from your company indicating that I owe you money and threatening to report this to "National Credit Reporting Bureaus." Your mailing indicates that the creditor in this matter is Pacific Bell.

    I called Pacific Bell this afternoon and they told me they have no record of any past-due balances owed to them.

    On the advise of my attorney, I am hereby demanding validation of this matter under section 809 of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Be advised I am not asking you for verification that you have my name and mailing address, but for competent evidence that I have some contractual obligation to pay you.

    Please be aware that if any negative mark is found on my credit reports from your company or any company you represent, this will result in my filing an immediate lawsuit against you and your client for 1) Violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 2) Violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 3) Negligent Enablement of Identity Fraud. I have ordered copies of my credit file from all three national agencies this afternoon.



    This letter was ignored. When they verified with Experian, I sent this letter.

    Dear Sir or Madam:

    On May 14, 2001 I wrote your company requesting validation under section 809 of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act of a debt you claim I owe to Pacific Bell. As of today I have received no response from your company except for the return receipt from my certified mailing signed on May 17. 2001. I am enclosing a copy of my May 14th letter.

    I contacted Pacific Bell by telephone on May 14th, and they tell me they have no record of me owing them any money. I have tried to contact your company for proof of this debt without success, yet you continue to report this unsubstantiated debt to the credit reporting agencies. In the case of Experian, I received word today that you verified as accurate two sets of duplicate collection accounts. Just how many accounts with Pacific Bell are you claiming I had? What a coincidence that they had identical balances!

    Because of this I can only conclude that you are willfully and knowingly reporting false information to the credit reporting agencies in violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Since you won't respond to my letters and you insist on verifying inaccurate information with the credit reporting agencies, I have no recourse other than to litigate. This letter will serve as my demand for payment of $5,000 as damages for your violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, defamation and negligent enablement of identity fraud. You may send payment to the address listed at the top of this letter. In lieu of payment you may send a letter of apology and remove your entries from my credit reports and I will drop legal proceedings.

    Please stop this willful and mean-spirited attack against me.



    Along with this letter I enclosed a printout of the complaint I filed online with the Better Business Bureau.
  12. godaddyo

    godaddyo Well-Known Member

    It is kind of funny how all this validation stuff goes. I used to be very aggressive in getting the creditors to validate debts. Some actually do and most unsecured debts never will validate. I do believe in asking for validation, but I am not as concerned with pushing the issue in every situation. I have had a lot of luck with getting the CRAs to remove information that the Collector refuses to validate. After requesting the validation and not receiving it, I usually wait about 30 more days and send a letter to the appropriate CRA demanding removal. I will then back it up with a phone call to either a supervior ( or in some cases the legal dept0. This does work and it has worked numerous times for myself. Of course you can still follow up with a second letter demanding validation or removal of the debt to the collector.
  13. Quixote

    Quixote Well-Known Member

  14. godaddyo

    godaddyo Well-Known Member

    Does the above article confuse anyone? Why is he referring to verification instead of validation in the letter? Verification is for the CRAs and Validation is for the Debt collectors under the FDCPA.. Hmmmmmm?
  15. chelechele

    chelechele Well-Known Member

    Aha, Grasshoppa......very interesting.....
  16. breeze

    breeze Well-Known Member

    A technicality. Semantics. We just have to have a way to distingquish what it is we are talking about so we use different terms.

    The opinion letter states what we know. CA's have to prove that they have the right person, and that that person actually owes money. They have to provide information from the original creditor in order to do this, and it is not the original creditor's problem, it is the CA's problem.

    What's confusing?

  17. breeze

    breeze Well-Known Member

    Hi Tom,

    Welcome to the board. :)

  18. Hal

    Hal Well-Known Member

    Thank you to everyone for their responses. These are the next steps I am going to take.

    I am going to modify the second letter previously posted to my situation, attache the opinion letter from the FTC and send it certified mail/rr giving them 15 days this time to respond.

    If they do not respond I am going to the CRA's next and demand that they remove the item.

    Wish me luck.
  19. Quixote

    Quixote Well-Known Member

    Thanks! I've been lurking for some time. Even started my own little holy war with all three CRA's and two collectors. Decent results so far. I'll post more about it when I have a better feel for what has worked and what hasn't.


    The Lurker formerly known as tda325 (It had no personality)
  20. breeze

    breeze Well-Known Member

    Cool. This one's definitely better.


Share This Page