Search the Community

Interesting that some WNY debt collectors are up to their usual tricks still. They close 10 companies and 20 more open up. https://www.wkbw.com/news/local-news/ny-ag-shuts-down-predatory-debt-collection-operation-based-in-getzville

I have picked these up over the years and would like to post them in one place. Hopefully they will prove as useful for someone else as they have been for me. If you have more stuff like this, please post it to this topic! Some are written by consumer attorneys (Edelman, Combs and the like) and others are written by the attorneys from the dark side as ways to weasel out of FDCPA liability (it's always a good thing to know what the other side is thinking). Pro-Consumer: Defending credit card cases, 2009.pdf Ethical issues of JDB suits.pdf FDCPA CASE LAW, NCLC.pdf FDCPA, Edelman Breakdown-2011.pdf From the dark side: FDCPA Defense Guide #1.txt FDCPA Defense Guide #2.txt

@BV80 This was filed yesterday in US District Southern District of California. https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/cfpb_encore-capital-group-et-al_complaint_2020-08.pdf Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Sues Debt Collectors and Debt Buyers Encore Capital Group, Midland Funding, Midland Credit Management, and Asset Acceptance Capital Corp. WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (Bureau) filed a lawsuit against Encore Capital Group, Inc. and its subsidiaries, Midland Funding, LLC; Midland Credit Management, Inc.; and Asset Acceptance Capital Corp. The companies, which are headquartered in San Diego, California, together comprise the largest debt collector and debt buyer in the United States, with annual revenue exceeding $1 billion and annual net income exceeding $75 million. Encore and its subsidiaries are currently subject to a 2015 consent order with the Bureau based on the Bureau’s previous findings that they violated the Consumer Financial Protection Act (CFPA), Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), and Fair Credit Reporting Act. The Bureau alleges that Encore and its subsidiaries have violated the terms of this consent order and again violated the FDCPA and CFPA. The Bureau’s complaint seeks injunctions against them, as well as damages, redress to consumers, disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, and civil money penalties. . . . . . . . The Bureau further alleges that the companies violated the CFPA by failing to disclose possible international-transaction fees to consumers, thereby effectively denying consumers an opportunity to make informed choices of their preferred payment methods. The Bureau also alleges that each violation of the consent order constitutes a violation of the CFPA."

Commack, N.Y.-based Forster & Garbus LLP sought to collect on more than 99,000 debts through lawsuits between 2014 and 2016, relying on “nonattorney support staff, automation, and both a cursory and deficient review of account files” to file those suits, according to CFPB complaint filed on 5/17/19. Federal district court case Forster & Garbus, LLP The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau today filed a lawsuit in the federal district court in the Eastern District of New York against Forster & Garbus, LLP, a New York debt-collection law firm. The Bureau’s complaint alleges that Forster & Garbus violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by representing to consumers that attorneys were behind its lawsuits when, in fact, attorneys were not meaningfully involved in preparing or filing them. The Bureau’s complaint also alleges that Forster & Garbus violated the Consumer Financial Protection Act’s prohibition against deceptive acts and practices by making such representations to consumers through its lawsuits. The Bureau’s complaint seeks an injunction against Forster & Garbus, as well as damages, redress to consumers, disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, and the imposition of a civil money penalty. CFPB v FORSTER & GARBUS, LLP,

I was sued by a JDB, and properly filed a MTC arbitration. Before the motion could be heard, the JDB filed for a default judgment. Eventually the MTC was granted. Did the JDB violate the FDCPA by filing for default once they knew I was demanding arbitration?

Good afternoon I disputed a MCM/Credit Ine on my Equifax CR several weeks ago. I received a letter today at my correct address with a copy of Credit One statement that was sent to a wrong address. The letter states they had received the disputed item from Equifax and ask what are you disputing? Our records... In reading another forum it states the shady tatitics MCM will go thru to collect a debt. The original Credit limit is/was Less than half of what they are saying I owe. That being the case I do believe that I would have paid such a small amount. The forum states to file a claim in Small Claims Court for violating FDCPA and FCRA. It also says they will NOT accept a "pay to delete" The Pay To Delete with an offer of 25% is something like $60 more than the court cost. It's such a small amount and is 4 years old. I just need it gone but DO NOT want a Small Claims suit backfire. A sample form from my county ask the amount I am suing for. What figures should i use if I decide to go this route. I just want it deleted. Not settled Deleted. Thanks for any advice or experience in dealing with them. M

Barclays Bank Delaware is one of five defendants with the others being a law firm & attorneys who sued me in small claims. I sued all five defendants under FDCPA & FCCPA. The law firm has retained counsel & filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. Barclays Bank Delaware is a Defendant under FCCPA only. They were served on April 9th and had until April 30th to answer. They still have not answered my complaint nor retained counsel. Should I file a motion for default on the OC before dealing with the law firms motion to dismiss?

Here is the scenario: Sued by JDB and during the lawsuit, the JDB lawyer has emailed me several times and has not provided the required FDCPA disclosures. Prior to litigation, this lawyer sent me a dunning letter that did contain the required notice. The fact that he was attempting to collect the debt and identified himself as a debt collector (IMO) subjects him to the FDCPA. (I have no doubt he "regularly" attempts to collect debts). Also, JDB is vicariously liable for agents attempting to collect on its behalf. Also, during discovery the JDB has admitted they applied interest to the account for an 18 month period following charge-off in which they did not own the debt. The situation here is that prior to filing the lawsuit I was provided a statement of account that showed that interest was applied. Going by the date I received this statement, the FDCPA SOL has expired. However, the fact that the JDB is the one that applied the interest was revealed through responses to my RFA's in July of last year (still within SOL). I was reading this thread and the discussion starting here: http://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/320695-suing-bursey-associates-for-filing-suit-on-midland-account-with-expired-sol/#entry1249949 I wanted to get some feedback on the "last opportunity to comply". Specifically, whether or not violations committed during litigation create their own SOL clock. Also, in the case of the interest, the SOL is well past going by the date the JDB applied the interest, but since I was not made aware of the violation until much later (and 5 months into litigation), does the SOL clock on this violation begin to run when I became aware the interest was in fact applied by the JDB? Does the date they filed the lawsuit play into this one at all?

I got served by a JDB, for a debt of an amount under $3,000 and am working on making my response. Thanks in advance for help!

Kind of a long story, but here goes. I knew what I should of done to make this a stronger case, but I was lazy and didn't copy the letter I sent in response because I didn't have access to a copy machine, and sent it off before I could copy it. That being said here's the story. In 2015 I joined Golds Gym. January. I wasn't using it like I should, but I was paying month to month (no contract) for my son to go too. He used it all the time. So I asked them if I could transfer my contract over to him, and they said yes. That was the end of March. I didn't realize it was a whole new contract for 1 year, I thought it still ended in Jan. I signed the contract, not my son who was a minor. Fast forward to Jan. 2016. Son had hurt his knee, and wasn't using the membership. I called and told them I was going to cancel after the February. Payment (which is actually 12 payments from when the new contract was executed. Feb. payment was made, and I really forgot about taking it off my auto payments. About that time my credit card number was compromised, so the cc. Co cancelled the card and sent me a new one. Never heard from golds gym until July of 2016 when I get a letter saying I owe 350.00 plus attorney collection fees, and to pay now or dispute within 30 days. The letter was addressed to my son. i did not ask for debt validation, I sent a cease and desist letter, I told them my son never signed a contract with them, and he was a minor child. I said you may contact me once more to tell me the disposition of this collection. Golds Gym is the OC, but the lawyers also function as debt collectors. This is the letter I did not copy before sending. in the mail 2 days ago I received a letter that said here is a copy of the contract, with all the one year crap highlighted, and the usual we are a debt collector trying to collect a debt. It said we received your letter and here is a copy of the contract, pay now. This has not been reviewed by an attorney, blah blah blah. It was addressed to my son, not me. The contract enclosed is signed by me. the same day they called my son on his cell phone. His phone number was not given when we signed the contract, but golds gym did have both my phone number and my sons in their membership records. My son told them "I'm not on the contract" and they told him it didn't matter, it was his membership. They asked him for a credit card number to pay the debt. He told them "I don't have a credit card and I am going to have to talk to my mom" and hung up. so he tells me they called. I told him he was not to talk to them if they called, and to snap shot a picture on his phone ig they called again. He said "oh, they have been calling me everyday, but I didn't answer until now". So needless to say I have one snapshot of when they called him. I think they may have figured it out because today there was a message from them on my phone that asked me to call, and this was an attempt to collect a debt. so technically this is the first time they have contacted me. The cease and desist was written because they were trying to collect from my son. ( who is now 18) Questions----would the cease and desist count towards me also? And concerning the violations to my son..would I sue because he was a minor when the contract was executed, or would he have to be the one to sue? Gets a bit murky for me. Tecnically I only owe them 29.00, but they are saying my membership didn't cancel when I called, I had to send a certified letter cancelling. ( that was in the contract) so their inflated bill is for extra months until it was "charged off" plus collection fees. Sheisters I tell you.

Hello, Years ago my wife had a judgement against her that lead to her bank account being emptied and wages garnished until the judgement was satisfied. It happens. The collection company failed to report that the judgement was satisfied in 2014 and we are just now realizing it in 2016 because it is holding us up from buying a house. We have called them asking for it to be taken care of and are always routed to a messaging machine or promised that it'll be faxed where we asked only to have it not happen. To me, from my research and according to the FDCPA, they responsible for providing misleading information about a debt and that has been affecting her credit for two years now. What can we do to get this taken care of? It appears that there is legal retribution for their carelessness.

About a year and half ago my credit monitoring agency alerted me that Comcast Cable had done a credit check on me in Georgia. I was stationed in Georgia about 9 months prior before retiring from the Army, but I had never had Comcast and at this point I had just recently moved to Colorado. I contacted Comcast to find out why they had run my credit and it turned out someone had used my name and SSN to get cable in a trailer park nearby my prior military post. I filed an identity theft report with the FTC and with my local police department and faxed all of these documents, along with proof of address and ID, to the Comcast Fraud Department. Comcast told me that they had closed the account and removed all the charges from it so I would not be responsible for anything. About 2 weeks ago I received another notice from my credit monitoring agency that a collections account for that very same Comcast account showed up on my credit report. A fraud investigator from my credit monitoring agency called Comcast and the debt collector with me to try to help resolve the situation. Comcast sent us around to about 5 different people, each time saying they were transferring us to their fraud department, until we finally got one rep who put us on hold for about 20 minutes while she looked into the account. She came back and said there were notes in the system about me calling in about the identity theft and that the representative put down that they were closing the account and removing the charges, but for some reason it never happened. The account wasn't closed until several months later after failure to pay and had something like $800 in charges on it. She said she had no idea why it was never closed and that I had done everything I needed to do. She then said she was going to make a detailed note and send us to the fraud department (!), because she had no power to reverse such a large charge. The next transfer took us to a slightly confused gentleman working at the FTC's identity theft hotline. He told us that Comcast has been sending a lot of their customers to the FTC and telling them that it was the Comcast Fraud Department. Next we called the debt collector that appeared on my credit report. We informed him that the account was related to identity theft and that we were disputing it. He said that he send the dispute over to their fraud department who would verify it with Comcast. All of these phone conversations were recorded, after informing the relevant parties, by both the Credit Monitoring Agent and me. Several days after I disputed the debt over the phone with the collector I received a collection notice from them for $633.12 for this disputed Comcast account. They don't state the results from my dispute, just the standard boilerplate collection notice. I don't know if this is a violation or not since they are attempting to collect on the account after I've disputed it and before they sent me any kind of notification that the debt is valid. It seems like dealing with Comcast's customer service is a dead end and now I am intending to file suit for violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act and possibly the Colorado Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. I have been contacting attorneys to discuss a lawsuit, but so far the ones I've spoken with feel this claim is outside their area of practice, they are too busy to take another client or they felt they were too inexperienced to handle this type of claim. I am still waiting to hear back from some other attorneys in the Denver area that practice consumer law in the Federal District Court there. I am about as far from Denver as you can be while still being in Colorado so taking this to Federal Court pro se would be extremely difficult for me. Instead I've contacted my local small claims court to discuss whether or not I'd be able to bring claims under the FCRA pro se. The court clerk wasn't sure and she directed me to the pro se office, who also had no idea. I informed them both that the law states: § 1681p. Jurisdiction of courts; limitation of actions An action to enforce any liability created under this title may be brought in any appropriate United States district court, without regard to the amount in controversy, or in any other court of competent jurisdiction, not later than the earlier of (1) 2 years after the date of discovery by the plaintiff of the violation that is the basis for such liability; or (2) 5 years after the date on which the violation that is the basis for such liability occurs. However, they weren't sure if the judge would allow it to proceed in this court or not. She suggested I speak with some more attorneys about whether I could bring this to court myself. Of all the attorneys I've asked only one said that it should be no issue bringing it to small claims court. The others said they honestly had no idea about the jurisdiction issue. I am thinking that taking this to the County court pro se might be a better compromise. I've been reviewing the text of the FCRA and the FDCPA as well as the Colorado FDCPA. So far I have identified the following violations of the FCRA: § 623. Responsibilities of furnishers of information to consumer reporting agencies [15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2] a) Duty of Furnishers of Information to Provide Accurate Information (1) Prohibition (A) Reporting information with actual knowledge of errors. (B) Reporting information after notice and confirmation of errors. (2) Duty to correct and update information (3) Duty to provide notice of dispute. (6) Duties of Furnishers Upon Notice of Identity Theft-Related Information (B) Information alleged to result from identity theft. If a consumer submits an identity theft report to a person who furnishes information to a consumer reporting agency at the address specified by that person for receiving such reports stating that information maintained by such person that purports to relate to the consumer resulted from identity theft, the person may not furnish such information that purports to relate to the consumer to any consumer reporting agency, unless the person subsequently knows or is informed by the consumer that the information is correct. (7) Negative Information (A) Notice to Consumer Required (i) In general. If any financial institution that extends credit and regularly and in the ordinary course of business furnishes information to a consumer reporting agency described in section 603(p) furnishes negative information to such an agency regarding credit extended to a customer, the financial institution shall provide a notice of such furnishing of negative information, in writing, to the customer. I believe that due to their admitted knowledge that the account was opened as a result of identity theft and their decision not to close the account immediately after being notified, then later sending it to the debt collection rises to willful noncompliance as defined by the US Supreme Court in Safeco Ins Co of America v Burr (06-01-2007), where they state: "Willful failure covers a violation committed in reckless disregard of the notice obligation. Where willfulness is a statutory condition ofcivil liability, it is generally taken to cover not only knowing violations of a standard, but reckless ones as well." Even if they did not intend to violate the FCRA and it was just a series of mistakes it was reckless not to close the account immediately and to send it to collections despite being notified it was related to identity theft. Then despite being notified and confirming their mistake they took no actions to correct it. Something that I haven't been able to find a clear answer on is whether each FCRA violation incurs separate statutory damages of up to a maximum of $1,000 or are all violations together a maximum penalty of $1,000? I've found both answers on the internet without any definitive references. My personal reading of the statute makes it sound like you can only get one statutory penalty. I'd love to hear everyone's opinion on this matter and would greatly appreciate any references, suggestions, etc. Thank you all.

Okay...so now I am really confused. Should I be happy or concerned or ??? Last week I received a Motion for Dismissal which was written by the Plaintiff's Attorney that was mailed on 23 February. I was in court around the 10th of Feb where I managed to get the judge to take a look at the Encore Consent Order and felt this was the resolution of that case based on that hearing. Fast forward to yesterday, I received a dunning letter on the same account. Same attorney, same account, same amount, everything and it was dated 11 February but it was mailed on 25 February. I think at this point I need to get an attorney and seek out some FDCPA money...what am I missing? What does the team here think?

Hi, All. Midland has been harassing me with phone calls and settlement offers regarding an alleged credit card debt for some time now. I've never responded. They're also reporting on my CR and I'd like to find a way to get it off, particularly since they entered the start date for the purported account 4 years after the alleged OC default. I believe that they've avoided filing a lawsuit because in California, this alleged debt would now be about a year beyond the SOL. I've read elsewhere on the site that reporting on my CR without listing it as "disputed" may be an FDCPA violation. Can anyone confirm or disprove this? Thanks, H8spp

I received two debt collection letters (attached here) from NCB Management Service Inc. allegedly on behalf of Barclays Bank Delaware. Collection letter #1 dated 7-7-15 states that a Barclays Bank Delaware account ending in 0328 is delinquent and all correspondence and payments are to be made to NCB. Collection letter #1 was received 7-14-15. The 30-day dispute period required by FDCPA started on 7-14-15. Collection letter #2 dated 8-6-15 was received during the 30-day dispute period. The subject of the first two paragraphs of letter #2 are a request to contact their office regarding settlement offers but are purposely confusing and contain a threatening statement regarding reporting discharged debt to the IRS as taxable income. I see at least three FDCPA violations caused by Letter #2. 1. The Letter #2 payment demand was received within the 30-day dispute period and worded to cause confusion and deception, purposely "overshadowing" the initial letter. 2. Letter #2 is purposely worded to cause a consumer confusion regarding "settlement options" and "repayment plan". 3. Letter #2 is purposely threatening and deceptive by linking "settlement" with reporting information to the IRS. Does anyone with experience filing or winning FDCPA cases agree that I have valid claims? NCB letters.pdf

I had cancer when I was 20 and was on disability/SSI and almost died during this time. I had a small bill that my parents did not pay of $700(I had no income). Apparently worldwide asset purchasing opened a lawsuit for collections on this $700 when I was 23(2003). My mom signed for the paper when it was sent and I never knew about it. They didn't pursue anything however. I am now 35(2015) and out of nowhere they opened the case back up, sued me, and garnished my wages for $2000. Is this legal?? The statute of limitations is 6 years in NJ. I have a lawyer going after them for the violation of the FDCPA, but the judge wouldn't dismiss it for me based on statute of limitations because he said they are allowed to reopen that case from 2003 at any time? The judge said I could file a motion to vacate which would cost $25+ to file...is it even worth it to try to win this or should I just let them garnish the $2000 and be done with it? It isn't even on my credit report.

Today I received requests from several companies on my CR requesting I validate accounts. Midland, Asset and PRA all 3 sent requests for Full Name, Full CC Number, Address (Current and past 10 years), approximate account opening dates, account balances, Last payment and date, and my employer name. NONE of them have judgments against me. GECRB did the same for two CCs that they claim I have/had. CAP1 did the same for 4 accounts they claim I had with them. NONE of these letters gave me any idea what they are talking about...no reference numbers or anything. I did recently do requests for verification with all 3 major CBs. Anyone seen this sort of thing before??

Trying to see who we have and where they are from when it comes to attorney. Anyone??

I've seen quite a few questions about Advanta, but I didn't see any like my situation where business credit card debt was sold to Carson Smithfield. We went through the closing of Advanta and the sudden increase in our interest rate like everyone else. We worked on paying it for years then started fighting the interest rate increase and did stop paying. We weren't getting anywhere then the account was charged off and sold to Carson Smithfield. We started paying the offered payment terms by Carson Smithfield, thinking we had no alternative. But recently I've started doing some research. As a part of my research I've realized that Carson Smithfield did not abide by Section 809 of 15 USC 1692g (a) sections (2), (3), (4), or (5). They provided the name of the creditor as Advanta, who hasn't existed and as far as my research goes the credit card debt is now actually owned by the FDIC, if that is incorrect please correct me. Subsections (3), (4), and (5) they simply did not provide those statements and I was left with the impression this was it pay this or be stuck forever. (I know I shouldn't have given up so easily.) I have also gone through and audited the account based on the actual account terms, not their jacked up ones, and found I've now over paid them several thousand dollars. I sent them a debt validation letter requesting: The agreement with the creditor that authorizes them to collect on the alleged debt, the agreement bearing my signature stating I have agreed to assume the debt, valid copies of the debt agreement stating the amount of the debt and interest charges, proof that the statute of limitations has not expired and complete history on the account all with an accounting of all interest charge changes, supported by account terms and additional charges being assessed. They responded with: "According to our files, you are currently paying under a settlement agreement on your Advanta Credit Cards account. In order to satisfy the settlement arrangement, Our records show you still owe a remaining amount of $xxxx.xx. Payment of this amount will prevent further collection activities." So not a response at all to my demand for debt validation. I'm hoping for others experiences or thoughts on dealing with Advanta / Carson Smithfield or those dealing with Advanta / Cardworks Serving.

Hi, In late 2010 I had a negative item appear on my credit reports from "Advanta Bank." Advanta Bank failed in 2009 and was shut down by the FDIC and State of Utah. They were heavily fined for deceptive and unfair business practices (ie. offering a 0% introductory interest rate and then rate jacking their customers to 38%). Advanta Bank ultimately declared bankruptcy. As far as I could determine, the FDIC was set up as a receiver for their deposits, and any debts owed were sold off to junk debt buyers. The former owners of Advanta have been individually sued for breach of fiduciary duty and other misconduct by the FDIC in relation to their ownership and management of Advanta. I disputed in writing to the three credit bureaus, providing proof from the FDIC that Advanta Bank no longer existed and could not be the reporting entity. I also disputed what was reported, because it was purely false and erroneous information. Equifax and TransUnion immediately deleted the info. Experian refused to delete the information and has continued to refuse my written disputes for the past four years. I have been turned down for credit as a result. I recently invoked arbitration over this and multiple other issues based upon the credit monitoring contract I have with Experian, which states clearly it covers FCRA disputes. I have yet to hear back on my arbitration demand, however, today I received in the mail a postcard advising me of the class action Michael Dreher v. Experian, specifically on this issue of Experian falsely reporting data from "Advanta Bank." The class action lawsuit properly states that the company known as "CardWorks Processing" is possibly the owner and reporting entity of past due debts emanating from the defunct Advanta Bank - but is reporting as "Advanta Bank" today and for the past four years as if they are the bank. Trying to resolve any reporting issue becomes a three ring circus and/or shell game between Experian, Advanta (which has no legal present address or contact) and CardWorks, making it impossible to correct incorrect negative information on Experian credit reports. If Experian were truly conducting meaningful investigations when consumers dispute as required by the FCRA, they would learn "Advanta Bank" is not reporting anything since 2009 or 2010 at the latest. Here's the class action lawsuit: http://www.advanta-experian.com/ http://www.buccidix.com/blog/experian-must-disclose-company-reporting-credit-report-debt.cfm http://www.cardworks.com/ When I eventually figured out the "Advanta Bank" address on my Experian report led to "Cardworks Processing" - I disputed in writing to "CardWorks Processing." I received a letter back with the name "Advanta Bank" rubber stamped at the top of the letter (not Advanta's original logo, but what appeared to be a rubber stamp pressed on an ink pad created for this purpose). What is interesting to me is Experian will do everything possible to avoid a class action, and uses arbitration clauses in their credit monitoring contracts to do just that. Now that a class action has made it to the trial stage, they are trying to lump me in with the class - to avoid the cost and expense of arbitration. My instincts tell me to opt out of the class action (which is a clearly spelled out option) and pursue my own individual case through arbitration or litigation if necessary, especially since my dispute has elements other than the Advanta issue. Any feedback on this issue is appreciated here. Please note I'm also posting this info for anyone else who has had a similar experience with Experian / Advanta. I think CardWorks Processing is committing fraud, violating the FCRA by knowingly reporting inaccurate information, and violating the FDCPA by misrepresenting the status of an alleged debt. I want to take legal action against them. If you agree, please feel free to post comments here or contact me via PM. Thank you.

Hi, About two months ago, I noticed a few inquiries on my credit report that I did not recall authorizing, so I disputed each one with the companies listed on my credit report, CMRRR. Over 30 days has passed since each company has received my dispute letter; of the six or so companies that have received the letters, only two have responded. I thought that they were required to respond within 30 days after receipt of the letter or they could be sued. An attorney I spoke with stated that I had to dispute through the credit bureus first, but that doesn't do anything because they just check eOscar or whatever and confirm it without proving that anything actually transpired. I wanted actual proof that I authorized these inquiries aside from the companies simply stating "Oh, you did." Do I have any right to sue at this point? What should my next step be? Thank you

Hi All, So I have been working on fixing a couple small errors on my CR the past month or so and have found some major mistakes I am taking action on. During this process I received a notice from Experian in the mail with two new accounts on it that were added to my CR that were not previously on there. Two very small old debts (almost 7 years). After doing some research under the FDCPA it looks like I should have received some communication from the furnisher within 5 days of putting this new data on my CR. 15 U.S. Code § 1692g - Validation of debts (a) Within five days after the initial communication with a consumer in connection with the collection of any debt, a debt collector shall, unless the following information is contained in the initial communication or the consumer has paid the debt, send the consumer a written notice containing—(1) the amount of the debt;(2) the name of the creditor to whom the debt is owed;(3) a statement that unless the consumer, within thirty days after receipt of the notice, disputes the validity of the debt, or any portion thereof, the debt will be assumed to be valid by the debt collector;(4) a statement that if the consumer notifies the debt collector in writing within the thirty-day period that the debt, or any portion thereof, is disputed, the debt collector will obtain verification of the debt or a copy of a judgment against the consumer and a copy of such verification or judgment will be mailed to the consumer by the debt collector; and(5) a statement that, upon the consumer’s written request within the thirty-day period, the debt collector will provide the consumer with the name and address of the original creditor, if different from the current creditor. Looking at this, inserting an item on my CR could be considered initial communication regarding debt. This was over 7 days ago it was inserted. No mail, no calls, nada. I realize the pro se approach to FDCPA violations is not easy because of heavy filing fees as well as what I have read as tougher court rules etc. If I have a potential case I will see if an FDCPA attorney will take it on for a 50/50 cut of any violation and negotiate deletions as well. Any thoughts?

Fred Hanna files a motion to dismiss and CFPB files its response. I recommend clicking through to read the CFPB's response: http://www.insidearm.com/daily/debt-collection-news/debt-collection/cfpb-gets-testy-in-latest-filing-in-debt-collection-law-firm-enforcement-action/ (I apologize in advance if this has been posted here already. I didn't see that it had been.)

Hi all, I received a debt collection notice from a JDB for an alleged debt with Comcast. The notice was dated 7/4/14 with an offer of settlement at 80% of the alleged debt. It should be noted that I rarely if ever mention the name of a party in my posts. In this case, for this particular company, I'll make an exception. I responded with a debt validation request pursuant to the FDCPA, and sent it CMRRR. The JDB received it 8/1/14. They provided no information from Comcast that validated the debt, no proof of any account - not even dates of service. Instead, the JDB responded with an identical copy of their original invoice, with the same settlement offer of 80%, now dated 8/5/14. I know the bar for validation is low, but this seems too low. Does a duplicate of the original JDB's invoice without even the dates of alleged service constitute validation? I don't owe any debt to Comcast. I've lived in communities where Comcast Cable TV was provided free to the community (as part of my lease payment or monthly maintenance payment). At some point in time, approx. 5 or 6 years ago, my company had high speed internet service with them, but it was a business account, and was paid and closed. The present billing dispute is in my name personally, not my business name. My primary question is did the JDB "overshadow" in violation of the FDCPA by sending me a second invoice before I was given 30 days to investigate the first invoice? If they received my DV letter on 8/1/14 and sent out a second invoice 8/4/14, it would appear this is the case. However, 31 days separate the dates of their two invoices, so they may argue they did not overshadow. When exactly does the 30 days time period to investigate begin? I am considering invoking the arbitration clause in the Comcast Agreement, filed in my County's public records. I can't stand this company, and would enjoy the proposition of making them pay thousands of dollars in Arbitration fees over a small billing dispute, and then FDCPA damages if I prevail. I could sue, too. Any thoughts on this? Did they overshadow? Did they validate? Does the least sophisticated consumer standard apply? P.S. Anyone reading this with a billing dispute with Comcast, please read your contract for services. It likely contains an Arbitration clause which they've inserted to try to avoid class actions. However, it does not prevent the consumer from invoking arbitration for their individual dispute, and forcing Comcast to pay the arbitration costs.

Hi All! I'm hoping to get some opinions on this matter. I live in Louisiana. I had a VZW chargeoff for $235, with the DOFD being May 2011. The debt was eventually sold to Pinnacle Credit Services out of MN in Dec 2013 according to soft pulls. The first communication I ever received from this debt outside of VZW was from Retrieval Master's Creditor's Bureau (RMCB) in Jan 2014. I disputed within the 30 day window via fax. NOTE: I disputed with RMCB within the 30 day window before Pinnacle was ever on my credit reports. Also, VZW is no longer on my credit reports. They've deleted. Actually, they deleted when Pinnacle took over.....then reinserted....I disputed and they deleted for good. RMCB received my dispute Feb 11, 2014. I verified they successfully received the dispute in writing & on the phone and passed the info the Pinnacle the same day. Pinnacle proceeded to enter the trade-line on my reports Feb 15, 2014. Is that not a FDCPA violation? I have my old EQ credit reports from Feb 2014, where it states when it was first reported Feb 15, 2014. Obviously since then that date was changed, especially after i dispute and brought to light that they knowingly reported after receiving my dispute but before verifying. Now, Pinnacle did validate after the fact by sending my statements from VZW in March 2014. But this was after the violation was already committed. I've disputed with the CRA's, CFPB, BBB, LA AG, etc. and it always came back and Pinnacle refuse to remove. I've attached my tradelines from the 3 CRA's that Pinnacle's reporting. Does it look like they are reporting as an OC? Does anything stand out as wrong? What should I do? I've even submitted for arbitration against Pinnacle more than a month ago and they've yet to reply. Lastly, this may very well be nothing, but does it make a difference that the Pinnacle tradeline isn't listed under the "Collections" section of my reports? In fact, it says I have none. I wanted to add...I've consulted with 1 FDCPA attorney and while she felt I may have a case (Edeh vs. Midland), she thought Pinnacle could claim they didn't receive dispute from RMCB in time before reporting and my case is a little weak, while technically viable.