BTW Doc, watch for an email from me sometime tomorrow. I'm probing into something and that will obviously take all night and then I'm going to have to verify at least some of the info tomorrow. I'll send you an email tomorrow if I can verify what a program I am running tonight ends up telling me.
Butch has obviously put in some MAJOR work in this, and has a much firmer base of knowledge then I do. How do the following opinion letters relate to stand up to his research on the 30 day validation period and whether you lose your validation rights after that? http://www.ftc.gov/os/2000/04/fdcpaadvisoryopinion.htm The Commission continues to believe that the thirty-day time frame set forth in Section 809 is a dispute period within which the consumer may insist that the collector verify the debt, and not a grace period within which collection efforts are prohibited http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fdcpa/letters/berger.htm We interpret the "thirty-day period" as a period within which consumers must dispute their debts in writing in order to avail themselves of their Section 809(b) rights , but not as a "grace" period My take on this is that although you don't loose any rights to go to court and fight the debt and it's validity, you do in fact lose your rights under 809(b). Now, what are actually your 809(b) rights? It seems to me that they are simply that the CA will cease collection activites until validation is completed. feedback/thoughts?
That's about the size of it. I fail to see anything more to it than that. And that was the crux of the Spears case even though the court did go into other issues as well.
While Butch's examination of validation was great as far as it went, in order to get a full and complete grasp of what is really demanded before the hammer can fall we need to looke at what courts have ruled on the matter as usual. I do think that just about anyone should be able to understand the following opinons on what validation is from the standpoint of the courts. 1. In Reed v.Scott, Okla, 820 P.2d 445, 20 A.L.R. 5th 913 (1991) the court ruled that rendition of default judgment requires production of proof as to amount of unliquidated damages. 2. In that same case, the court furthermore ruled that when face of judgment roll shows judgment on pleadings without evidence as to amount of unliquidated damages then judgment is void. There are several more cases which support the fact that evidence in the form of affidavits is simply not sufficient evidence of debt. They have got to have a competent witness there in the court to testify in person or the judgment is void. In other words this old garbage where they enter an affidavit stating that some lump sum of money is due and payable and the defendant has defaulted and they prey for judgment and get it they have got absolutely nothing at all. Now then, how many good and valid judgments do you folks think are out there? Or a better way to put it would be just what percentage of all judgments out there are null and void upon their face? Quite frankly I doubt that even 1/100th of 1 percent of all judgments out there are any more than toilet paper. And so back to validation. The only difference is that the standard for validation is a lot less than is required to make a valid judgment, but the main principles remain the same.
Butch, Doc, let's start a club of non-newbies. It will be mutually beneficial. I Have very useful info.
Butch, Doc, let's start a club of non-newbies. It will be mutually beneficial. I Have very useful info.
Butch, Doc, let's start a club of non-newbies. It will be mutually beneficial. I Have very useful info.
Butch, Doc, let's start a club of non-newbies. It will be mutually beneficial. I Have very useful info.
Butch, Doc, let's start a club of non-newbies. It will be mutually beneficial. I Have very useful info.
Butch, Doc, let's start a club of non-newbies. It will be mutually beneficial. I Have very useful info.
Butch, Doc, let's start a club of non-newbies. It will be mutually beneficial. I Have very useful info.
Butch, Doc, let's start a club of non-newbies. It will be mutually beneficial. I Have very useful info.
Re: Re: --> What Is Validation? Butch, Doc, let's start a club of non-newbies. It will be mutually beneficial. I Have very useful info. kemcos ================= Why the need for your posting this same post 9 times??
I'm a newbie I have on question, He the debtor, still has to pay something right. Even if the OC looses the original contract if they can produce statement and you admitt you used the product, they can claim "Unjust Erichment"? If you have time I would appreaciate an answer on that one. MOVINGONUP Thanks, is a great thread.
Re: Re: --> What Is Validation? Hi Moving, Welcome to the board. Our small claims court system works on the "preponderence of evidence" standard. There are other ways to prove you owe a debt even if they cannot come up with the contract. Copies of checks you've written, phone conversations where you admit the debt or witnesses with first hand knowledge etc. If you file in federal court they may have a more difficult time proving the actual liability without the contract. You might even prevail on a motion for summery judgement. Don't forget, there's a huge difference between actually winning a court case before a judge and pushing your legal issues in the hopes that your adversary will chose not to deal with it and just let you have your way. It's easier and cheaper to do it that way. Nobody can really predict what will happen in court. Afterall didn't most people think OJ would be convicted? But we can predict with a reasonable degree of certainty that because our adversaries are lazy, crooked, only interested in more money, etc., that they will give up before you become too much of a pain in the butt. Which is what I was. I cleaned up and perfected my reports by pushing these legal arguments but I never did actually have to file. They just knew I was going to drive them crazy if they didn't acquiesce.
Re: Re: --> What Is Validation? Okay, butch... I, for one, would like you to continue as you have time with this thread. It cleared a lot up for me, but in the same moment created so many more questions. My main question I will post to the board next as to not hijack this thread any further.
Re: Re: --> What Is Validation? Thank You for PSP answer and the "unjust enrichment" question. I stll consider myself a newbie, I'm not trying to highjack but I think the following question will be a great addittion to this thread(let me know if I'm overstepping), it continues with the topic of validation. I paid a telephone bill that was in collections to the OC and I presently have service with them, in good standing, but at one point I had fallen behind and they sent to a collection agency. This CA, has two entries as paid, on my TU. Now, I never contacted them, I don't even know these guys. Do you think in a situation like this it would be best be handled by sending the a DV letter and point out they are in violation of FDCPA, i.e., I never got a mini-maranda, the OC accepted my payment which emplies that they didn't have a firm binding contract to collect,.... So, have them remove, or not valdate on next dispute, or else seek legal and regulatory recourse?
Re: Re: --> What Is Validation? 1*I have one question, He the debtor, still has to pay something right. 2*Even if the OC looses the original contract if they can produce a statement and you admit you used the product, they can claim "Unjust Enrichment"? MOVINGONUP ================== 1*Why would the debtor have to pay anything on something the CA can't validate? 2*The FDCPA Does not say that a claim of Unjust Enrichment satisfies the requirement of validation.
Re: Re: --> What Is Validation? Even if the OC looses the original contract 1*if they can produce a statement and you admit you used the product, 2*they can claim "Unjust Enrichment"? M OVINGONUP ************************************ 1*I can give you a statement but does that prove you owe me for it? Did you use your car yesterday? Does that prove you owe for it? 2*But can they prove it? THE END ** *** ** LB 59 """""""""```~~~```'"""
