notagain

Members
  • Content Count

    168
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10 Good

About notagain

  • Rank
    Impressive 100+ postings

Profile Fields

  • Location
    cloaked

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Dunned several days ago by Law Office claiming to work for CA. The letter stated: This was their second attempt. I ignored their first attempt. If I did not respond, they may take legal action. Since I never got the first letter as they claim I sent a timely response to their second letter (my first letter), CMRRR, stating: I never received anything This was their first contact I am requesting them to validate the debt pursuant to FDCPA. I got two phone calls after that. One my machine picked up, the other I answered and recorded with permission. They said: “You lost your chance to validate, the post office never returned the first letter as undeliverable, which means you probably just ignored it like you did all the other mail our client sent you, and we are going to recommend they bring a lawsuit against you.’ Whenever I tried to speak, he would simply speak over me. I don’t see any reason a judge would rule that I received the first letter, and rule that I lost my chance at FDCPA protection. I never received the first letter, and they certainly have no RRR signed by me evidencing that I did. Any judge would see that I clearly stated this was their FIRST contact, and that I wanted validation. I’m not lying about it, they can’t prove I am, why are they risking possible FDCPA violations, when all they have to do is assume I might be telling the truth and validate the god damn thing? It appears that next I will be served a copy of a Motion for Summary Judgment. HOW SHOULD I PLAY THE VALIDATION CARD? Should I petition with a Motion to Dismiss plus a COUNTERSUIT? They phoned me twice after I got the RRR back. If the 30 days started after they received my request, that’s two violations. Of course, they will argue I lost my chance when I didn't reply to this phantom first letter within 30 days. Thanks, gang. Notagain
  2. Dunned several days ago by Law Office claiming to work for CA. The letter stated: This was their second attempt. I ignored their first attempt. If I did not respond, they may take legal action. Since I never got the first letter as they claim I sent a timely response to their second letter (my first letter), CMRRR, stating: I never received anything This was their first contact I am requesting them to validate the debt pursuant to FDCPA. I got two phone calls after that. One my machine picked up, the other I answered and recorded with permission. They said: “You lost your chance to validate, the post office never returned the first letter as undeliverable, which means you probably just ignored it like you did all the other mail our client sent you, and we are going to recommend they bring a lawsuit against you.’ Whenever I tried to speak, he would simply speak over me. I don’t see any reason a judge would rule that I received the first letter, and rule that I lost my chance at FDCPA protection. I never received the first letter, and they certainly have no RRR signed by me evidencing that I did. Any judge would see that I clearly stated this was their FIRST contact, and that I wanted validation. I’m not lying about it, they can’t prove I am, why are they risking possible FDCPA violations, when all they have to do is assume I might be telling the truth and validate the god damn thing? It appears that next I will be served a copy of a Motion for Summary Judgment. HOW SHOULD I PLAY THE VALIDATION CARD? Should I petition with a Motion to Dismiss plus a COUNTERSUIT? They phoned me twice after I got the RRR back. If the 30 days started after they received my request, that’s two violations. Of course, they will argue I lost my chance when I didn't reply to this phantom first letter within 30 days. Thanks, gang. Notagain
  3. Thanks so much for clearing that up. I searched around the internet, and even read Wikepedia about it, but couldn't get a clear answer. I was worried about exactly that, they record me, but I don't get permission from them to record them... Your explanation makes sense, because you shouldn't get to have your cake and eat it too... If you want to record someone, be prepared for that shoe to fit your foot as well. notagain
  4. OK, is this actually true in a two party state? If he says he is recording, DO I NEED TO TELL HIM I AM? There must be case law on this... notagain
  5. Thanks. I was considering going to court if need be with phone bills only. That would have been embarrassing! Cool. The agent told me we would be going to a 'secure line' and I asked what that meant. He said it meant it would be recorded. The number is an instate number (two party), it's coming from the CA's office.
  6. I needed the RRR to prove when the CA attorney got my DV request, but the lazy postman never recorded the date, just got a signature... Any suggestions? The stamp is cancelled with a date, but that really doesn't prove when it was received... Argh... Thanks, notagain
  7. In the letter I got, they claimed they already contacted me by mail, and that this was my second notice. So, I told them they were mistaken, that this was their FIRST contact, and that under FDCPA I was requesting validation. I sent it CMRRR and got it back today. They are attorneys. I'm pretty sure they plan on validating... My state is two party. I bought a recorder, and will be using it moving forward. We'll see what I can come up with... Thanks, notagain
  8. I was dunned by an attorney CA for CC debt not SOL. He is about the SEVENTH one to buy it! First attorney. I'm sending him a DV. I'm expecting he will have something that most here would say qualifies as validation. I guess the only good reason to try validation is to TRY AND COLLECT FDCPA VIOLATIONS? Soooooo, if he calls within 30 days of having received my request, and before replying to it, that is a violation. Can't I just make note of his call, and copy my phone records? WHY DO WE NEED TO TRY AND RECORD HIM? Is it to see if we can get more violations from improper statements? Thank you so much!!! notagain
  9. Question: So many people contend all CAs need to do is respond with a copy of a statement, and bingo, they have validated, get ready to roll over... I was dunned by a lawyer on CC debt. I'm pretty sure they are going to have something that most people here will say qualifies as validation. If the CA is a lawyer, WHY BOTHER? Is the purpose to try and collect FDCPA violations? notagain
  10. Wow, I didn't know that. Man, one little mistake and there goes your case! notagain
  11. I wish there was a sample debt validation letter here... I've seen TrueQ's, but I would like also a simpler one, too. Both could go in this sticky notagain
  12. I'm subscribed. I've read the entire thread, and boy is it interesting reading! Please do keep posting the blow by blow. notagain
  13. Thanks Retmar, now that I should have seen... :embarrassed: I agree with you that there is nothing wrong with asking that communication only be in writing. If you give section 805 of the FDCPA a read, subsection (a) disallows the CA to communicate with the consumer 'at any time or place known to be inconvenient to the consumer'. By telling them not to phone you, but to make all communication written, you imply that no time is convenient by telephone. Interestingly, the law does not explicitly state that it governs telephone communication, but implies it by referencing time of communication, rather than an address (which would govern communication by post). I think people confuse the separate concepts in subsection (a) COMMUNICATING WITH TEH CONSUMER GENERALLY with those in subsection © CEASING COMMUNICATION which governs the actions of a CA who has been given a CEASE AND DESIST letter. If you do send the CA a C and D, you force the CA to sell to another JDB, give up, or sue you. You give them no choice, because they no longer have the hope their phone calls and letters will effect you. IMHO notagain