Jump to content

Copy of Acct Statement

Recommended Posts

I sent validation letters to two collection agencies and both responded with copies of account statements from the original creditors. I understand from reading posts on this board that this is not considered sufficient validation, but I have yet to see anything that specifically states that the "laundry list" of documentation requested in the validation letters (copy of the signed contract, agreement between ca & oc, etc.)is required. The Wollman letter merely states that verification is required and that an itemization of the information that the ca already has is not sufficient. I guess a copy of an account statement is itemization, but what should I reference to justify the other documentation requested? If all of these things are required to validate (and nothing less), where in the FDCPA or case law or opinion letters is that stated? I just want to make sure my second letter is properly worded and have documentation to back it up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welcome to the board :)

Read the case below in regards to documentation supporting a debt claim.

Spears v. Brennan

Issue Four: Failure to Cease Debt Collection

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. Therefore, Brennan violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692g(B) when he failed to cease collection of the debt by obtaining a default judgment against Spears after Spears had notified Brennan in writing that he was disputing the debt but before Brennan had mailed verification of the debt to Spears. See footnote We reverse the trial court’s entry of summary judgment in favor of Brennan on this issue.

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.