Validation Vs Verification I KNOW I KNOW!!!!!

[Chancy949]

I KNOW I KNOW its different, but here is the notice i recieved on a collection letter in the mail today.

Federal Law

Unless you notify this office within 30 days after receiving this notice that you dispute the validity of the debt or any portion thereof, this office will obtain VERIFICATION of the debt or obtain a copy of a judgement and mail you a copy of such judgement or verification. If you request this office in writing within 30 days after receiving this notice, this office will provide you with the name and address of the original creditor if different from the current creditor. This is an attempt to collect a debt and any information obtained will be used for that purpose. This communication has been sent by a debt collector.

OK! Wonder why we confuse the two??? I thought I was to ask for Validation and they are telling me they will only send VERIFICATION.....

.....help.... very confused......

[Chancy949]

This is interesting the FRCP.......

It seems The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) govern the conduct of all civil actions brought in Federal district courts. While they do not apply to suits in state courts, the rules of many states have been closely modeled on these provisions. Therefore what follows may be the final determination of what constitutes debt validation.

"...According to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) you have a legal right to demand the original and they have 15 days to produce it or there is NO DEBT.

FRCP - Rule 1002 Requirement of Original - To prove the content of a writing, recording, or photograph, the original writing, record, or photograph, is required, except as otherwise provided in these rules or by Act of Congress.

FRCP - Rule 1003 - Admissibility of Duplicates - A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as an original unless (1) a genuine question is raised as to the authenticity of the original or (2) in this circumstance it would be unfair to admit the duplicate in lieu of the original.

"So as you can see law is replete with insistence that your right to see an original contract is carved in stone. Although what does constitute validation is not clearly articulated in law or case law, and for very good reason, the burden of proof to which a collector or OC must rise, before discussions can even begin, is high.

[luckyduck]

These are rules outlining the admission of evidence in court aren't they?

If that is the case, then it is only applicable to federal court proceedings. How are you linking this to debt validation? Just curious if I'm missing something here.

[luckyduck]

My previous post was just a hunch. Just from those two rules, I could tell you it was rules of evidence. This is not the FRCP, it's the FRE. Federal Rules of Evidence. I did the research.

First, I found your source for that post, and the source obviously wasn't a reliable or knowledgeable source. Always double check information before jumping in and believing it, especially when it's so easily double checked. Don't take that wrong. It's just a word of advice. I try not to believe anything until I've seen it myself.

Those rules are only applicable in federal court cases, not in utilizing federal laws that haven't gone to court yet. Below lists what these rules apply to, and they come straight from the code.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rules.htm#Rule1101

Rule 1101. Applicability of Rules

(a) Courts and judges.

These rules apply to the United States district courts, the District Court of Guam, the District Court of the Virgin Islands, the Disrict Court for the Northern Mariana Islands, the United States courts of appeals, the United States Claims Court, and to the United States bankruptcy judges and United States magistrate judges, in the actions, cases, and proceedings and to the extent hereinafter set forth. The terms "judge" and "court" in these rules include United States bankruptcy judges and United States magistrate judges.

( Proceedings generally.

These rules apply generally to civil actions and proceedings, including admiralty and maritime cases, to criminal cases and proceedings, to contempt proceedings except those in which the court may act summarily, and to proceedings and cases under title 11, United States Code.

© Rule of privilege.

The rule with respect to privileges applies at all stages of all actions, cases, and proceedings.

(d) Rules inapplicable.

The rules (other than with respect to privileges) do not apply in the following situations:

(1) Preliminary questions of fact. The determination of questions of fact preliminary to admissibility of evidence when the issue is to be determined by the court under rule 104.

(2) Grand jury. Proceedings before grand juries.

(3) Miscellaneous proceedings. Proceedings for extradition or rendition; preliminary examinations in criminal cases; sentencing, or granting or revoking probation; issuance of warrants for arrest, criminal summonses, and search warrants; and proceedings with respect to release on bail or otherwise.

(e) Rules applicable in part.

In the following proceedings these rules apply to the extent that matters of evidence are not provided for in the statutes which govern procedure therein or in other rules prescribed by the Supreme Court pursuant to statutory authority: the trial of misdemeanors and other petty offenses before United States magistrate judge; review of agency actions when the facts are subject to trail de novo under section 706(2)(F) of title 5, United States Code; review of orders of the Secretary of Agriculture under section 2 of the Act entitled "An Act to authorize association of producers of agricultural products" approved February 18, 1922 (7 U.S.C. 292), and under section 6 and 7© of the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act, 1930 (7 U.S.C. 499f, 499g©); naturalization and revocation of naturalization under sections 310 - 318 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1421 - 1429); prize proceedings in admiralty under sections 7651 - 7681 of title 10, United States Code; review of orders of the Secretary of the Interior under section 2 of the Act entitled "An Act authorizing associations of producers of aquatic products" approved June 25, 1934 (15 U.S.C. 522); review of orders of petroleum control boards under section 5 of the Act entitled "An act to regulate interstate and foreign commerce in petroleum and its products by prohibiting the shipment in such commerce of petroleum and its products produced in violation of State law, and for other purposes", approved February 22, 1935 (15 U.S.C. 715d); actions for fines, penalties, or forfeitures under part V of title IV of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1581 - 1624), or under the Anti-Smuggling Act (19 U.S.C. 1701 - 1711); criminal libel for condemnation, exclusion of imports, or other proceedings under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 301 - 392); disputes between seamen under sections 4079, 4080, and 4081 of the Revised Statutes (22 U.S.C. 256 - 258); habeas corpus under sections 2241 - 2254 of title 28, United States Code; motions to vacate, set aside or correct sentence under section 2255 of title 28, United States Code; actions for penalties for refusal to transport destitute seamen under section 4578 of the Revised Statutes (46 U.S.C. 679); actions against the United States under the Act entitled "An Act authorizing suits against the United States in admiralty for damage caused by and salvage service rendered to public vessels belonging to the United States, and for other purposes", approved March 3, 1925 (46 U.S.C. 781 - 790), as implemented by section 7730 of title 10, United States Code.

Sort of the way I word it when dealing with CAs, to mix rules of evidence with DV is this:

Well, if you can't provide me with the proof that I'm asking for, then it would seem that you wouldn't be able to provide it to a court either, and therefore, I have no reason to negotiate with you/settle with you/pay you/cooperate with you/etc...

Basically, show me that if you wanted to sue me, you could prevail based on the evidence, and I will work with you. And that means proof of everything, including the debt being mine, the amount of the debt, the legality of anything exceeding the principal amount, the legality of you collecting in my state, the assignment by the OC, etc...