Jump to content

How can this OC be the Assignor in a lawsuit?

Recommended Posts

In case this can be answered without an explanation:

I originated a loan with *A* in 1992. *A* sold the loan in good standing to *B* in mid 1993. Financial problems came, and we defaulted in late 1995, a few months short of pay off.

CA calls representing *C* who supposedly now owns this account. I want proof of the amounts, get none. I am now being sued, but the CA is listing himself as an assignee of *A* insted of *C*.

I have a letter from the president of *A* stating that they are not pursuing any legal matters and have no interests in the loan. (SOL does not apply in this case.)

Is there something wrong with this picture, or is this some type of legal maneuvering?

In case a more detailed explanation is needed...

On Dec. 3 I was served papers to appear in a matter on Jan.6. I am still trying to figure this thing out.

Original contact from the CA was back in Feb, by phone. CA claimed to represent a company I never heard of. Said that a defaulted loan was bought by the company and that I now owed them $2300, and *how would you like to take care of this?*

I asked what the debt was for, and he mentioned an OC that sold our account to another lender almost 10 years ago! (The account was not in default when sold.)We went through a financial fiasco just over 7 years ago, and have been paying things off ever since, but this was one account that had not been dealt with yet. I couldn't remember all the pertinent details about the account at the time, so I told him to send his information in writing so that I could verify that his facts were correct. (No, the SOL does not apply here. :( )

I was thinking that there would have been about $7-800 left owing on the account, but wasn't totally sure as those records were lost in a move. :( :( So, I wait and receive a computer type letter stating that so-and-so has bought my defaulted account (no mention what account) and that a principle balance of $2300+ is due and payable now.

My understanding was that a principle amount is the amount due before any interest, ect, so I began wondering if we were talking about the same debt!!

I get a couple more letters offering to settle, but still nothing else.

I was getting annoyed because I have never been denied substantiating proof before. (Maybe I was just lucky??) I began doing some internet searches and found information about the FDCPA, and that validation letter, and decided to give it a try, the only thing is, I didn't word it quite right.

I referred back to the original phone call and my request for information, and requested again that I be given the information needed to verify that this is accurate information. (I used the word verify, but not dispute. :( )

The only repsonse was another letter stating that they were now looking into my employment and assets to begin legal proceedings.

I didn't know what to do. I never *refused* to pay them, as the letter stated, I just wanted PROOF before forking over any money!

So 2 months later, I get a letter from an attorney. Stupid me, called tried to explain that I am still waiting for proof of this debt, and as soon as I get some, I can make decisions about possible payments. It was not a pleasnat conversation. It ended with being told that she would get back to me the next day. (HA! HA!)

the next that I hear from any of them is when the police officer shows up at my door.

Attatched to the back of the petition is a photo copy of the card I signed when I took out the loan. If they just would have even sent THAT to me 6 months ago it would have given me enough information to begin making my own inquiries!! Still no accounting for the debt. (I know there was a debt, I just want to know how much!!!) The petition just states the date the damages are being assessed from, how much is principle, and how much in extras they are asking for. The numbers still don't add up right if taken at face value.

The kicker in all this, is that the CA is sueing as an assignee of the OC!! There is no mention anywhere in this petition of the company he has claimed to be representing all along.

The OC sold this loan 20 months before it was even in default. We have spent days and hours trying to track this down and finally got to talk to someone with the OC that could find that this loan ever existed. She said "something is wrong here, we are not suing you, your account left here in good standing."

So this afternoon, I got a personal phone call and a letter from the president of the company stating that they have no interest in the account and are not pursuing any legal or collection activity against me.

Will this letter help me in any way? I don't see how they can use the OC in the petition when I don't owe them any money. One attorney my husband talked to said that it would n't matter one way or the other, that naming the OC as his assignee is "just a matter of reference"

I don't understand that at all.

We were also told that even though it may seem unfair in how they did it, that the contract being attatched to the petition will probably be accepted as validation since the petition gives a date and amount.

If this is so, then what recourse do I have if I believe the amounts to be inaccurate, even though I don't dispute that money may be owed?

Any suggestions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I assume that when you said you asked for proof, you sent them a debt validation letter? If you didn't specifically say debt validation, maybe your letter can be construed as such? Maybe you post a copy of what you sent.

They have no right to sue you if they have not provided you with proof. I'd go into court (Make sure you go) and waive a copy of the FDCPA (make sure you are VERY knowledgeable about this document) and maintain that they cannot sue you because this is further collection activity. Also, take a copy of Spears Vs. Brennan and the FTC's Wollman letter with you so you can show the judge what constitutes proper validation (proof of the debt).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the feedback! :)

I had 4 letters from the CA, but none of them stated the 30 day clause. I just assume at this point that if I scream about that, they will just say to "prove we didn't send it." I can't *prove* they didn't send it.

I don't have the letter I wrote to them handy right now (I do have it though, and have been over and over it this past week)but basically...

I stated this letter was in response to the phone call and letters sent to me in regard to a debt they were offering to settle.

I then asked them not to call me again, but to only contact me in writing.

Then I stated that I am still waiting for the information requested in the original phone call. Would you please send me the following information?

1. Who is the Randolph Financial Agency and how may they be contacted?

2. From whom did they aquire this debt?

3. What is the original *charged off* balance on this account?

4. What amount is interest and other charges, at what interest rate, and for how long has it been charged?

I ended it by stating that I do not discuss payment arrangements or settlements on any debt claimed to be owed until I have enough information to personally verify the debt.

I have been told that since I didn't come out and say "I dispute this debt" it won't be considered a valid, validation request.

Finding someone knowlegable in FDCPA has been impossible. We live in the boonies where neighbors still shoot their neighbor's horses to make a point! :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Is it the CA that is telling you that you never "disputed" the debt?"

Yes, and no.

The *attorney* for the CA told me that since I agreed that there *may* be a debt, my letter could not be taken as a dispute. (Of course in the same call she told me that I needed to just pay my debt and go on, among other things, since I had contacted her previously and asked for a settlement of $1000, I admitted that I agreed to the debt. I NEVER offered to pay ANYTHING to these people unless they PROVE the amount due, let alone call and ask for a settlement!! :mad: )

We have talked with a local attorney who deals with contract law, not the FDCPA specifically, and he felt the letter was a weak defense. But he also stated that FDCPA is not his area of expertise.

He is however, working on the the avenue of the CA claiming in the petition to be an assignee of the OC when he is not.

UGH!! I am so frustrated with all this, and running out of time, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't remember where it is on this site, but there is a case called Spears vs. Brennan that I think would be very helpful in your case. Swede, are you there? Swede is always up on case law and she should be able to steer you in the right direction. Why don't you start a new topic, Spears vs Brennan and maybe that will catch Swede's attention. Ask for the info. Also check www.ftc.gov and do a search for some case law. I'll be praying for you :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites


"the next that I hear from any of them is when the police officer shows up at my door.

Attatched to the back of the petition is a photo copy of the card I signed when I took out the loan."

A police officer? What? Did you originate a loan from the Fraternal Order of Police? :upsidown:

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.