Jump to content

Sample of the 2nd Debt Validation Letter


Recommended Posts

Your Name

123 Your Street Address

Your City, ST 01234

Big Bad Credit Collector

Their Street Address

Some City, ST 56789 7/18/1999

NOTICE

This second notice is my response to your unsigned letter dated May 28, 1999 [copy enclosed].

As I have not heard back from you in over 30 days since my notice of dispute dated 6/8/1999, and since you have not supplied the demanded proof of the alleged debt, under the doctrine of estoppel by silence, Engelhardt v. Gravens (Mo) 281 SW 715, 719, I may presume that no proof of the alleged debt, nor therefore any such debt, in fact exists.

In a good faith effort to resolve the matter amicably, I restate my demand for proof of the debt, specifically the alleged contract or other instrument bearing my signature, as well as proof of your authority in this matter. Absent such proof, you must terminate this collection action, and correct any erroneous reports of this debt as mine.

For the record, I state again: As I have no account with you, nor am I your customer, nor have I ever entered a contract with you, I must ask you to provide the following information:

1. Please evidence your authorization under 15 USC 1692(e) and 15 USC 1692(f) in this alleged matter.

2. What is your authorization of law for your collection of information?

3. What is your authorization of law for your collection of this alleged debt?

4. Please evidence your authorization to do business or operate in this state.

5. Please evidence proof of the alleged debt, including specifically the alleged contract or other instrument bearing my signature.

You have 20 days from receipt of this notice to respond. Your failure to respond, on point, in writing, hand signed, and in a timely manner, will work as a waiver to any and all of your claims in this matter, and will entitle me to presume that you sent your letter in error, and that this matter is permanently closed. Your continued silence is unacceptable. Either provide the proof, or correct the record to show this debt as void.

For the purposes of 15 USC 1692 et seq., this Notice has the same effect as a dispute to the validity of the alleged debt and a dispute to the validity of your claims. This Notice is an attempt to correct your records, and any information received from you will be collected as evidence should further action be necessary. This is a request for information only, and is not a statement, election, or waiver of status.

I affirm, under penalty of perjury under the Laws of the Land for these United States of America, that the foregoing is true and correct, to the best of my knowledge and belief. Witness My Hand and Seal this 18th day of July, 1999.

your signature

Your Name

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your Name

Your Address

City, State Zip

Non-cooperative Collection Agency

1 E. IWantToBeSued

Colorado Springs, CO 80901-1120

Date: Nov 1, 2002

Re: Acct#’s 212487, 5904602, 5904602, 5903026, 10010019

To Whom It May Concern:

I have previously sent you a request to validate my debt under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and all I received was an itemized list of the alleged charges you claim I owe you. This does not meet the Federal Trade Commissions guidelines of what constitutes proper debt validation. I am attaching an opinion letter from the FTC, (the Lefevre-Wollman) letter, specifically addressing the kind of “documentation” you have sent me.

In addition, in the case of Spears Vs. Brennan (IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA, No. 49A02-0003-CV-169), the court ruled that:

15 U.S.C. § 1692g(B) (emphasis added). On November 12, 1996, nineteen days after the date of Brennan’s debt collection letter, Spears’ counsel Shepard sent Brennan a letter declaring that Spears “disputes your debt collection-related allegations, denies the same, and demands strict proof and verification thereof.” Record at 21. As such, Brennan should have ceased his debt collection efforts immediately upon receiving that letter. Instead, Brennan proceeded to obtain a default judgment against Spears on the debt collection claim before he had mailed Spears the necessary verification and, thus, violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692g(B).

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. We reverse the trial court’s entry of summary judgment in favor of Brennan on this issue.

I notice that you are still reporting this collection on my credit report, which is considered to be a collection activity. You are now in violation of the FCPDA, and are now subject to fines of $1000, plus actual damages and attorney’s fees, which I may collect from you by filing a claim in small claims court. These collections on my credit report are causing me severe problems in trying to purchase a home and the damage could lead into the $1000’s. I am also attaching an opinion letter from the FTC on the illegal practice of continuing to report these collections on my credit report without proper validation (Lefevre-Cass letter).

You should also be aware that reporting such invalidated information to major credit bureaus might constitute defamation of character, as the negative marks on my credit report harm my credit and prevent me from enjoying all the benefits of good credit. In addition, the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) does not allow the inaccurate reporting of information on my credit report and under this act. Therefore, if you do not immediately remove this account from my credit report, you are subject to another $1000 fine, plus punitive damages. I'm sure your legal staff will agree that non-compliance with this request could put your company in serious legal trouble with the FTC and other state or federal agencies.

In addition, according to Arizona Statues 32-1024, collection agencies must be licensed in the state of Arizona. I have checked to see if you have a registered agency here in the state of Arizona and you have not, so you are practicing illegally in the state of Arizona.

I intend to follow through with the suit if I do not hear back from you within 15 days.

I look forward to hearing from you,

Your Name

Enclosures

<The documents you are attaching can be found at:

http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fdcpa/letters/wollman.htm

http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fdcpa/letters/cass.htm>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • 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.