Jump to content

Uh-oh


ssgbarnes19
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just got this today in the mail. This is the first time I have heard from them.

National Credit Systems

Re: Original Creditor

File#: XXXXXXX

Balance: A lot of money!

Dear Addressed to me

Your refusal to make suitable arrangements to satisfy the above referenced debt has resulted in your account being reviewed for litigation feasibility.

If voluntary payment of this account is not made, we may recommend that our client proceed with legal action against you in a court of law. Our client may also seek court costs and/or attorney fees, along with interest from the date the judgement is obtained in addition to the original balance owed on your account. If a judgement is obtained, our client may pursue its lawful recovery options, which may include any or all of the following, based upon legal procedures allowed in your state:

1. Ganishment of wages (states excluded: NC,SC,PA,TX).

2. Liens placed on property including:

-automobiles

-real estate

-other property

3. Seizure & auction of personal property

To avoid further costly collection activity, it is imperative you contact me immediately.

Sincerely,

Stupid Collector

Collection Representative

Direct Line: XXX-XXX-XXXX or XXX-XXX-XXXX

Please direct all correspondence to:

blah blah blah

This is an attempt to collect a debt by a debt collector. Any information obtained will be used for that purpose.

I have never received anything from this company before. I am just recntly retired military and have moved a whole lot.

I know my next step is to send a DV to them. But aren't they breaking the rules by not sending me a notice of my rights (mini-miranda), and telling me they are going to take this to court? Any advice would surely be apprecitated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok here's the problem. All the collector has to do is show a court that they prepared a letter to send to you and that it was not returned by USPS as undeliverable and they can get off the hook.

What you need to do is send a DV to them and very specifically in the letter tell them that the letter you got on X-date was the first communication from them that you have received at your present address. Make sure you send it CMRRR so you have their signature on receiving it.

Once they get it, they must comply with a validation response before they can proceed with any further collection activity. That includes filing a suit or reporting it to the CRAs. If they have already reported it to the CRAs they are required to update it to "disputed," but they cannot add a new trade-line once they get your letter. If they respond with a summons, you will have to get an lawyer and counter-sue them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Overshadowing is an understatement. It's up to the OC to take you to court - there's no reason for the CA to state what they did except to scare you into paying them.

If that's your initial contact with them, they have 5 days to send you the required info under FDCPA 809 Validation of debts:

(1) the amount of the debt;

(2) the name of the creditor to whom the debt is owed;

(3) a statement that unless the consumer, within thirty days after receipt of the notice, disputes the validity of the debt, or any portion thereof, the debt will be assumed to be valid by the debt collector;

(4) a statement that if the consumer notifies the debt collector in writing within the thirty-day period that the debt, or any portion thereof, is disputed, the debt collector will obtain verification of the debt or a copy of a judgment against the consumer and a copy of such verification or judgment will be mailed to the consumer by the debt collector; and

(5) a statement that, upon the consumer's written request within the thirty-day period, the debt collector will provide the consumer with the name and address of the original creditor, if different from the current creditor.

If you don't receive this, they are in violation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is on my CR's already, but I haven't made any contact with them. I just decided upon reading these forums to access my CR's after 6 years of not even seeing my CR's. I have moved alot. What if they delivered this to one of my old addresses and it wasn't forwarded to me? Feeling somewhat overwhelmed, but I'm going to type up that DV letter and send it CMRRR. I'm sure that I don't let them know that they are in violation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There can be a number of reasons that they may have sent the initial letters to another address, especially if you've moved a lot. But as I said, all they have to show is that they mailed it and it wasn't returned and they get off the section 809 hook. All they have to do is sign a statement that they mailed it to you and didn't get it back and most judges accept it.

Doc is right in that the CA can't sue you if they are assigned the account. The OC has to. But if the CA bought the account, they can sue you.

Since it is already on your CR, you should also prepare a dispute letter for each CR it is listed on and send that out too.

Be that as it may, you have to get the DV letter out ASAP to put the brakes on them. Keep an eye on your CR. If they don't update it as disputed within 30 days, you will have them on violating the FCRA and the FDCPA. You can claim statutory damages of a grand for all the violations of the FDCPA they do and one thousand dollars for each FCRA violation. If they don't do what they are supposed to with your CR the $$ adds up quickly. Such as if they verify the disputed items with the CRAs and fail to update as disputed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off, WELCOME HOME SOLDIER!!

Follow the advice of the others as this is the best to get things started. Once you have the ball rolling, we can assist you in more avenues you can take.

Just to mention, please communicate with your Congressmen and Senators to stop allowing the DOD to lie before the Courts of the US and get all of our benefits back as were promised to us upon retirement from the Armed Forces of the United States.

RETMAR, U. S. Marine Corps Retired (Vietnam)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One more thing. How did they get this address? I have been here for almost 2 years. And why didn't they send a initial letter trying to collect a debt to this addresss?

Little thing called skip tracing. Anyone can find anything about anybody these days - the CA's use every trick in the book (including talking to your friends and neighbors to find out where you are).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that letter would have intimidated me not so long ago, before i learnt i had rights.

personally i hate letters that begin by accusing you of something

letters like that may be well written, lots of use of the word 'may' we may do this, we may do that..

but its the effect on the consumer that must be looked at

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what I see.

They start the letter off using the word "refusal". This is their right to assume IF they, in fact, did send the initial letter offering the rights, etc. as prescribed by law, and received no written dispute from the consumer. Since all that they have to say is "Yes, we did mail" to the courts, the consumer has no argument. BUT, if the CA/ATT admits the letter was returned, the consumer does have a strong argument to claim overshadowing. Show me one CA/ATT who will admit this. A consumer in the Military, who is moved around alot could also present an argument if they can prove they did receive mail forwarded by the Military APO/FPO from other sources, but, it is not an absolute defense.

As to the rest of the letter, the only items I see that can be misconstrued are the mentions of "suitable arrangements" in the first paragraph, while referencing "voluntary payment is not made" in the second, along with the threat of a possible suit, then following with the verbiage of "costly collection activity". The LSC could become confused for the reason that many will consider collection activity and suit to be two different actions, therefore, causing them to wonder exactly what is going to happen if they do not make immediate payment. Also, when you read the letter, you see "arrangements"and automatically think they will accept monthly payments, while "voluntary payment" could lead one to believe they must pay in full.

Therefore, I do not see the letter as "Overshadowing" as the definition describes, but, I do see it as falling into a very Gray area that does offer some argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow! A newbie like me getting comments from all the "heavyweights" on this site. Thanks guys. I'm currently trying to draft a DV letter, stating that I received no communications from this CA and the usual DV statements. Appreciate the input guys!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gray area indeed. I'm trying to look at this as if I don't know the FDCPA even exists.

This fits the posts that we've seen in the past when people who don't know their rights post a 'panic' thread because of the way the letter is written - those "help, am I being sued? What do I do?" posts?

Of course, being biased against CA's is factored in as well...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doc, I can appreciate your stand on this, but, when I look at these things, I try and look at all angles instead of just one, as you mention in your statement of "bias of CA's". As ghacorp was pointing out, it is a well written letter in regards to what it is representing. Can it be considered "confusing" to the LSC? Yes! Is it absolute "Overshadowing"? No! Is it argumentive? Yes!

What I do is follow exactly what I was taught in College. Most of my "Teachers" were working Police (Uniform and Detective), DA's, Crime Lab, ME's, and PO's. One thing that was advised by them in many cases was to always use your Dictionary to assure you have the correct meaning of a word, especially if you are trying to fully understand the wording in a particular law. This way you would always understand the intent of the law. Remember, it has been proven that you can place X amount of people in a room and ask all the same question. It will be hard to find a majority who agree on the answer due to personality and/or one's own understanding of a definition. Another place is in the Church. Think about how many Churches there are in this World and how most will claim they follow the Bible, but, their definition of a particular Chapter will differ more times than you can imagine. It is how they interpret the wording. Therefore, always open your mind and look at all angles before you make your decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree 100% with both you and ghacorp on the letter itself- it's a well-crafted letter where the verbiage doesn't outright indicate overshadowing. However, the intention is very obvious, hence my opinion. Clever indeed - it just pushes the line, but stays on the side of legal as worded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree 100% with both you and ghacorp on the letter itself- it's a well-crafted letter where the verbiage doesn't outright indicate overshadowing. However, the intention is very obvious, hence my opinion. Clever indeed - it just pushes the line, but stays on the side of legal as worded.

Only so long as this is truely a second or third letter. If this is the initial communication then the CA is toast. I read on a couple of CA board that they are trying out this new tactic of using dunning letters that are written like this as the first letter they send because they have found out all they need is some crooked person at the CA to sign an affidavit that they sent another letter prior...no real proof whatsoever is needed to show prior letters. The CAs know this and are trying to leverage it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only so long as this is truely a second or third letter. If this is the initial communication then the CA is toast. I read on a couple of CA board that they are trying out this new tactic of using dunning letters that are written like this as the first letter they send because they have found out all they need is some crooked person at the CA to sign an affidavit that they sent another letter prior...no real proof whatsoever is needed to show prior letters. The CAs know this and are trying to leverage it.

According to the poster, this is the first communication.

I can understand the dissenting opinion, and agree that wording stays within the "legal" realm (as far as FDCPA), but as I said, the intentions have overshadowing written all over it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is the whole of my comments, Methuss, when I made the reference to "Show me a CA/ATT who will admit it". To me, this is one part of the law that definitely needs an alteration of sorts. An example would be the CA/ATT must provide the actual initial communication with cancellation from the USPS on the envelope and clearly showing the "Return to Sender" stamp, if returned, or, a receipt from the USPS showing proper postage was paid at the PO for this particular letter to be sent to consumer. If the postage was paid by Meter, then the "return" stamp from the USPS would suffice. In short, they must show the absolute proof the letter was returned by the USPS, or was actually sent, and not from someone saying they did because it is a normal function of their operation. It is not that hard to change dates on a Meter. I say this as I have always been under the impression that what is required of one should be required of another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...

my apartment complex sent my account to his agency as well, possible around 2-4 weeks ago

this collection agency has NOT contacted me YET

This account is NOT on my credit reports yet either

I want to stop it before it gets there

Should I write the CA and ask to make payment arrangements and ask them not to send the account to collections. The amount is $1800, I can afford to pay $50 a month for 3 years.

What do you all suggest?

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.