Validation Letters

Yes it is a good letter to use...Send the validation letter you are writing about immediately. The debt is past the SOL so you have an absolute defense if they sue you.

Do not alter much of the letter, there are carefully chosen words that you should use, but do tailor it to fit your situation. Yes they work...many here will attest to that.

Good Luck.

-Peace, Dave

 

If it is past the SOL and no longer on your reports, don't worry about it. Let them file and when you answer just bring up the SOL as an absolute defense.

Gib

 

Hey Markman,

If you're sure this is post SOL and beyond the 7 year obsolescence period, all ya need to do is point that out and send them a letter that basically says "forget it, move on to more productive targets".

Don't you guys think validation is basically a moot issue.

By demanding validation you're asserting the wrong argument. You're saying this is uncollectable because you can't/won't/didn't validate, when in fact even if they could/did validate it's STILL uncollectable.

Only need to go the validation route if you want to bait them into violations, but this is a hassle.

All depends on whether you want this to just go away or if you want to play with them, you meanie.

 

Yes!! Entirely true a C&D letter in this case would suffice.

My thought is one violations, ok...two violation better.

but you are correct butch, pick your battles, and a violation is a violation just the same.

-Peace, Dave

 

well ok, I already said it was late and I was tired so I can disagree ;-)

I think he should do the validation, because it's with a local attorney. Sometimes the SOL can be tolled.

So, if you do a validation and then follow-up with the SOL all while knowing nothing about nothing, which is the key I believe with this old stuff.

He'll have all his duckies in a nice straight row in case the attorney wants to try and play hard ball.

Sassy

 

again with the nodding - know what I mean?

-Peace, Dave

 

LOL Dave,

I do and here's a bump to go with it ;-)

Sassy

 

Mark,

The short answer is (from below):

Whatever you do, I discovered in researching today, do not acknowledge the debt as yours or make any arrangements or agree to have it put on a new credit card -- that's just what they want you to do. Any of those actions starts the enforcement SOL all over again!

<<snipped>>Which is the point of the contact -- paying, acknowledging, agreeing -- it tolls the SOL in most states. And, all you have to refute that you paid is a verbal threat, which is awfully hard to prove when the he said/she said's start flying.

Additionally, WhyChat pointed out somewhere, I can't find the thread now, in some states, if you move or leave the state for some amount of time -- that time doesn't count in the SOL calculations.

I'd go with the validation and follow-up, depending on how they respond, with the SOL whammy. Just remember it's SO old you don't remember anything.

I'd keep it all in writing, as tempting as phone calls are, words are easily twisted. Unless you're like Butch and record and transcribe with each ring LOL.

Sassy

From this thread: http://consumers.creditnet.com/straighttalk/board/printthread.php?threadid=33697

The difference between you and edoggie is that he was served and paid in lieu of a judgment.

Here's the background and WhyChat's letter: http://consumers.creditnet.com/straighttalk/board/showthread.php?s=&postid=241264#post241264

It's FDCPA, Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, located here: http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fdcpa/fdcpact.htm

§ 807. False or misleading representations [15 USC 1962e]

A debt collector may not use any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of this section:

2) The false representation of --

(A) the character, amount, or legal status of any debt; or

(B) any services rendered or compensation which may be lawfully received by any debt collector for the collection of a debt.

4) The representation or implication that nonpayment of any debt will result in the arrest or imprisonment of any person or the seizure, garnishment, attachment, or sale of any property or wages of any person unless such action is lawful and the debt collector or creditor intends to take such action.

(5) The threat to take any action that cannot legally be taken or that is not intended to be taken.

In some states it is illegal to pursue collection after the SOL has expired, for the rest of us it appears to be a gray caselaw area. I posted about this yesterday here -- actually I think it came up in 2 or 3 threads yesterday, this seems to be going around.

http://consumers.creditnet.com/straighttalk/board/showthread.php?s=&postid=241267#post241267

It's lengthy, sorry, just cut down to the sending a cease and desist and including "any and all communication, direct and indirect" and see WhyChat's sample letter.

Whatever you do, I discovered in researching today, do not acknowledge the debt as yours or make any arrangements or agree to have it put on a new credit card -- that's just what they want you to do.

However, the problem you are going to have is that you paid it. Which is the point of the contact -- paying, acknowledging, agreeing -- it tolls the SOL in most states. And, all you have to refute that you paid is a verbal threat, which is awfully hard to prove when the he said/she said's start flying.

Sassy