Validation Letter to OC?

Discussion in 'Credit Talk' started by Steve880, Jul 20, 2002.

  1. Steve880

    Steve880 Well-Known Member

    In another of my threads I asked what to do after the CA did not respond to my validation request. The tradeline is under the OC, NOT the collection agency.

    In the same thread someone suggested a modified validation letter to the OC. Does the same thing apply where there is no time limit? Or do I refer to the letter to the OC as a dispute, therefore invoking a 30 day time limit to prove the debt is mine?

    Thanks for the help
     
  2. tac14033

    tac14033 Well-Known Member

    Under the FCRA the OC is not required to validate a debt, this would only apply under the FDCPA and only to CA's or Attorneys acting as debt collectors.

    The OC does have a responsibility under the FCRA to investigate your dispute and communicate such to the credit bureaus, which then should be listed on your files as "Consumer disputes account".

    Alot of times what I have found is the OC will blow you off entirely and not even respond back to your letter, let alone investigate you dispute or tell the CRA's about it.

    I have sent about 20 different OC's a modified version of a validation letter. Basically, I always state in my first line that I am in full dispute over the information they are reporting about me and I request an investiagation. I also add "To help in my investigation of this account I will need from you the following within 30 days...." I state that this will help ensure the incorrect information you are reporting about this account gets corrected.

    BTW, always send it certified return receipt so you have proof of them getting your dispute, this is very valuable later when they claim they never got it.

    The only OC's to ever respond were...Providian and Cross Country Bank, but none of the OC's ever listed or communicated to the CRA's that the account was in dispute with me.

    This is good.....Because this is the violation I sue them on to get them to delete the account from my credit files!


    BTW, you will have to actually file suit against the OC's as they just ignore any letter threatening legal action anyway.

    They will then want to contact you all of a sudden to find out what the problem is.

    I let them know in no uncertian terms of their violations against me. Some want to contest that they have followed the law fully. I said if that is your contention then you can explain it to the judge in court and deny any hard evidence I have to the contrary. I then state you can Delete the account and send me a check for my court costs or you can go to court and pay me then??

    I haven't had one actually want to go to court, they will all settle or not show up.


    Good Luck!

    Tac
     
  3. Steve880

    Steve880 Well-Known Member

    Thank you. That provides extremely helpful information.

    I send everything regarding financial matters CM/RRR so that is never an issue.

    From what I can gather, if the letter I would send them would constitute a "dispute." Therefore, like the CRA's the OC would have 30 days to investigate and provide contractual evidence that I owe them this debt. If they do not respond within the 30 days I forward a copy of the letter sent to the OC to all 3 CRA's CM/RRR stating they are reporting information that the original creditor was not able to verify. Thus, the CRA's should delete the tradeline.

    Correct or did I miss something?
     
  4. tac14033

    tac14033 Well-Known Member

    Steve,

    I wish that were the case! However the OC doesn't have to validate with you within 30 days, they are only required to verify with the CRA's within 30 days and again, not you or me or any other consumer for that matter.

    I wish that were the case because it would mean I'd already have a clean credit report.

    There is no time limit for them to investigate our dispute or prove we even owe it to them for that matter. Therefore again the 30 day rule only applies when the OC is contacted by the CRA in notice of our dispute to the CRA. If the OC doesn't respond to the CRA's correspondence or phone calls within the 30 days then the CRA must delete the account from our credit files. The OC is however required to communcate to the CRA's when we contact them that we are in dispute over the account the OC is reporting, this is clearly written and stated in the FCRA.

    This is something I have never seen done yet!

    As far as using your correspondence to the OC as proof that the OC did not respond or prove you own the account you can try this. I have done this before when disputing accounts with the CRAs and have included copies of my correspondence to the OC and copies of the return signature receipts. It has worked out a couple of times but I'm not sure if it was because of that or if the OC just failed to respond back to the CRA within the 30days. I can only summise that it did work because these were some stubborn accounts that always kept getting verified and now since I sent them my proof of contact to the OC they were now deleted from my credit files.

    It's worth a shot!

    Another thing I always do is once I know the OC is in receipt of my dispute I then dispute it with the CRA.

    When it gets verified if it does, it must then state "Consumer disputes Account", if it does not then you have caught the OC in an FCRA violation.

    Also when contacting the OC, don't mention any laws or cite any sections of the FCRA or dare tell them that they need to notify the CRAs to tell them you are in dispute.

    They should already know the law and it is not my job to educate them and make sure they are doing what they are supposed to be doing.

    It is my job to make sure they comply with the law if they violate such!!

    If they didn't know and you tell them, then they do now!

    Tac
     
  5. Steve880

    Steve880 Well-Known Member

    I wish it was like that too, but understand pretty good now how this works.

    It sounds like my best bet would be to dispute with the CRA's first and see how that goes. One of my concerns is though that the CRA may just say it's "verified" when they didn't do anything at all. How would I know otherwise? Send the procedural request letter?

    Another question I have is how does a creditor verify to the CRA that the account is mine? The only proof I am willing to accept is a written contract with my signature, and clearly the CA handling the account for the creditor cannot obtain such documentation as they have not yet validated after 2 months, therefore the CRA should be in the same boat as far as trying to verify it, but from what I've read it seems that they somehow verify quite a few things that they shouldn't have. Again, do I ask for copies of the documents used to verify the account and the procedure which is used? I would send the letters that were mailed to the CA and copies of the RR to the CRA, but since the CA is not reporting anything, I don't think that would do much good.

    The tradeline is listed under the OC, not a collection listing, that's why I am so unclear on how to go about disputing this for removal. I want to have the so called "paper trail" that makes it time consuming for the creditor to verify.

    I appreciate the help. I wish I would have known about this type of stuff a while ago, would have saved some headaches.
     
  6. Butch

    Butch Well-Known Member

    NOOOO lol,

    Tac did a great job at providing a synopsis of one way to deal with this, (tho not the only way). The point he was trying to drive home is that he provided to OC with EVERY possible opportunity to break the law. Lets call it "violations entrapment". :)

    Once the OC violates that's the amunition used as leverage to obatin removal of the tradeline.

    The easiest violation to get is the requirement to list the account as in dipsute with the CRA. For various reasons OC's never do. It's a combination of arrogance, lazyness, and thinking they are above the law on such matters.

    Here's the caveat; If you notify the CRA the CRA will begin an investigation by contacting the OC. This provides an opportunity for the OC to put the account "in dispute" notation in your file which you DO NOT want.

    Forget that! Just as soon as you have your violation on the OC file and get a case number. Bypass the CRA altogether.

    Like Tac said, as soon as they get served they will be in touch forthwith.

    By contacting the CRA you may be shooting yourself in the foot.

    Good job Tac,

    :)
     
  7. Butch

    Butch Well-Known Member

    On 5/15/02 Kelly posted her case:

    "Today I went to small claims court. I posted a few weeks ago about my progress with several small claims suits against collection agencies and original creditors. I was suing each company for failing to report to the cra's that my debts were disputed. I had sent them all certified dispute letters for the past 5 months. I got no proof back from them at any time and my latest credit reports still show none of them reported as disputed. I sued for $1,000/each for violations:

    Section 807(8) of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act:

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

    (8) Communicating or threatening to communicate to any person credit information which is known or which should be known to be false, including the failure to communicate that a disputed debt is disputed.

    and

    Section 623(a)(3) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act:

    § 623. Responsibilities of furnishers of information to consumer reporting agencies [15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2]

    Duty to provide notice of dispute. If the completeness or accuracy of any information furnished by any person to any consumer reporting agency is disputed to such person by a consumer, the person may not furnish the information to any consumer reporting agency without notice that such information is disputed by the consumer."

    Continued ...
     
  8. Butch

    Butch Well-Known Member

    Continued ...

    On 7/21/02 here's her update;

    "Hi all,

    I just got a letter today from the court saying that Discover has dropped their appeal. A few weeks ago, I sent them a letter about the FTC opinion letter regarding sec 623(a)(3) that I was bringing to court, and they subsequently folded. So I won a whopping $128 for them not reporting my debt as disputed.

    This moral victory concludes my credit repair journey. 10 out of 11 derogs (mostly charge-offs) removed. Discover will stay on the report for 2 more years, but I got the bragging rights and a 2002 Audi!

    Kelly
    "

    It works :)
     
  9. Steve880

    Steve880 Well-Known Member

    Butch and Tac,

    I just thought of something. If the CA handling the collection for the OC has not sent validation in 2 months and I have proof they received the initial letter, how could the OC or CRA even write/say it is "verified" ? I have documentation that a CA could not validate in 60 days (and counting) yet somehow the OC verified to the CRA's that it was "verified."

    Don't I have all 3 of them (OC, CA, and CRA) backed into a corner here?
     
  10. tac14033

    tac14033 Well-Known Member

    Technically, Yes!

    But....CRA verification and CA to Consumer/Debtor Validation are two different things.

    Yes you could prove in court that you sent the CA numerous letters and have proof that they did not send you the validation they are required to.

    The CA then verifies it with the CRA, which is a big no-no!! This is considered continued collection activity on the part of the CA and you can show in court their violation of such.

    And as I stated in my previous posts the OC is under no obligation by either the FCRA or FDCPA to validate a debt with you. Their responsibilities under the FCRA are different then that of a CA is under the FDCPA.

    You could sue the CA and CRA and get them both in court and ask each other how this account keeps getting verified when you can't get verification or a response from the furnisher.

    You know what they will do??? Lie and make up excuses!! I have had this happen to me and you will have to counter back to their claim or have some real proof to say otherwise. The judge might just take them for their words unless you can catch them in a big lie!! Which I've already done successfully!

    Yes, it gets super confusing but after you've done it a few times it will be like getting dressed in the morning! LOL!!!

    Tac
     
  11. Butch

    Butch Well-Known Member

    Woops,

    You're absolutely right Lizardking. I forgot all about that little nuance'
     
  12. MEinSoCal

    MEinSoCal Well-Known Member

    Tac and Lizardking,

    How many times have each of you actually filed a law suit and won? Anyone of you filed suit against AMEX or regarding an AMEX acct in default? Just wondering...

    I currently have 2 AMEX accts that were charged off 11/99 and one of them is now being handled by a law office out in NY that is threatening to obtain a judgment against me if I do not respond w/in 30 days. I will be sending out my validation letter tomorrow. Anything else either of you can advise me before I send it off tomorrow?
     
  13. tac14033

    tac14033 Well-Known Member

    I file 10 times and only had to go to court once.

    The other 9 settled out of court for full deletion and payments ranging from $500.00-1500.

    The one I took to court I won $1259.50, which was a CA.

    Once the suit is filed and the defendant served it is a VERY serious message to the defendant that you are not going to put up with their crap or non response to your letters.

    Some will contact you right away and ask what you want and how they could settle.

    Some will call and say "Ya, know I researched this and I really don't think your going to get very far with this suit!"

    My reply..."Oh, I'd have to strongly disagree, and even if I did lose I would have already won because I'd have the pleasure of making you come all the way to court!"

    Some will hold out until almost the very last day and in the case where I did go to court they won't even contact you at all.

    I liked that one, because to add insult to injury I told the CA if he would have called me before court all I would have wanted was deletion and no money, even though I know this isn't true, I wanted him to think that after the fact. I then stated.....How and when can I expect my payment sir??

    Suing somone should be taken very seriously and not done to be frivilous, as the court does not look down upon people who do this just for the fun of it.

    If they see this happen you will feel the full wrath of the courts!!

    However, when one has tried and tried and tried somemore to work something out and the other party doesn't wish to work it out or abide by the laws they are responsible to follow, then this is the only way to make them answer and pay for their actions.

    Very powerful indeed!

    Tac
     
  14. PsychDoc

    PsychDoc Well-Known Member

    Reading another excellent thread elsewhere by humblemarc, I came upon this thread tonight. The technique described by tac14033 in this thread strikes me as exceptionally powerful! This is a must-read. I realize this thread is almost a year old, but it deserves a serious bump.

    Doc
     
  15. jason_l

    jason_l Well-Known Member

    Here's the approach I'm using:
    start with the CRA dispute, then after the 30 days dispute with the furnisher (followed by pulling your CR to see if they reported your dispute). This would cover the requirement to try and settle via the CRA, yet prevents the CRA dispute from either showing your TL in dipute from the CRA, or from the CRA dispute triggering the OC/CA to get off it's butt and report the dispute.. Plus, it takes care of the low hanging fruit when half the disputed TL's are dropped :)
     
  16. kak

    kak Well-Known Member

    Wow! Thanks PsycDoc for the bump and thanks Tac14033 for the great technique. This is exactly the information I needed to tackle those last few stubborn TL with OC's. I am thinking that this okay to use even if the OC is paid, correct? I did send a version of the "Nutcase" series, but got no answer. This makes it sound like, since they did not mark the account as in dispute after receiving the letter, they committed a violation. Am I correct in this thinking. Thanks everyone for the GREAT info.
     
  17. leahsj

    leahsj New Member

    I know this is a really old thread but does this process still apply or have rules changed? If it is still a valid way to dispute with the OC, can someone kind of map out the timelines of when you do everything? I'm getting somewhat confused as to when to send what, when to check cr to see if the item is listed as disputed, etc.
     
  18. leahsj

    leahsj New Member

    Bumping bumping
     
  19. trahnier

    trahnier Member

    In for some more info
     

Share This Page