Jump to content


Recommended Posts

An OC sent a copy of a signed contract :(

And boy am I needing advice for my next step. From what's been posted on these boards it looks like that I need to dispute dates & balances now :notsure:

Are there any other? stratagies :confused:

Could I get some support on how to challenge this tradeline now

(paid chargeoff).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Per the FTC Wollman opinion letter, only providing a copy of a signed contract is NOT complete validation. You might want to read the Wollman and Brennan letters. Time for another letter stating that their validation is incomplete and attach a copy of the Wollman letter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Case Law

Spears v. Brennan

Brennan maintains, however, that there was no violation of the FDCPA because he “sent adequate verification of the debt [to Spears] in the October 30, 1996 notice of claim.” Brief of Appellee at 13. Specifically, Brennan claims that a copy of the consumer credit contract between Spears and American General attached to the notice of claim provided sufficient verification of the debt within the meaning of 15 U.S.C. § 1692g(B). We cannot agree.

The contract in no way provides sufficient verification of the debt. A review of the document reveals that it identifies only the terms of Spears’ loan, including a 17.99% annual interest rate and the original loan amount of $2,561.59. The loan agreement contains no accounting of any payments made by Spears, the dates on which those payments were made, the interest which had accrued, or any late fees which had been assessed once Spears stopped making the required payments. Indeed, the existing unpaid contract balance at the time Brennan sent the debt collection notice was at least $350.00 more than the original loan amount

FTC Opinion Letter

Wollman Letter

The statute requires that the debt collector obtain verification of the debt and mail it to the consumer (emphasis mine). Because one of the principal purposes of this Section is to help consumers who have been misidentified by the debt collector or who dispute the amount of the debt, it is important that the verification of the identity of the consumer and the amount of the debt be obtained directly from the creditor. Mere itemization of what the debt collector already has does not accomplish this purpose. As stated above, the statute requires the debt collector, not the creditor, to mail the verification to the consumer

Common sense

One without the other doesn't prove that a) the account is yours and B) the alleged amount of the debt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hence, I should somehow state in a letter to the OC "provide the month and year of the first delinquency" and dispute the same with the CRA "inaccurate info, what is the month and year of the first delinquency"...and should that request (demand) come back to me fulfilled, another strategy could be the amount that was charged off and balances...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>Originally posted by kimber6337

Swede, are you a lawyer or paralegal or do you have cases taped to your walls?? LOL I love your posts with cases noted.


LOL addicted or what? Hmm Hello, my name is Swede- I'm a credit repair addict.

[Edit by Swede on Wednesday, 20, 2002 @ 04:43 AM]

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.