Jump to content

Did you know this is a violation?


Recommended Posts

Got this from edcombs.com:


in the section immediately after the OVERSHADOWING section, which is also pretty darn good.


Where the validation notice is placed on the back of the correspondence, without a legible and reasonably prominent reference on the front, §1692g is violated. However, the enclosure of a separate 8-1/2 x 11" validation notice in the same envelope has been found to be acceptable

Evidently, if the 30 day notation is not on the front or referenced large enough for "least sophisticated debtor." to understand, it could be construed as a violation.

This whole section on this site about the FAIR DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES ACT UPDATE -- 1999 * case laws referenced and everything is worth the reading.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.