ibdeujo2 Posted April 29, 2005 Report Share Posted April 29, 2005 Hello Everyone!I am new at this discussion forum and may ask some naive questions. So, forgive me in advance.I had an account with Capital One that went delinquent. As a result they have sent me to collection, Account solutions Group. When I sent a DV letter to them, they forwarded my account back to Cap1 for collection. (Did I fail to mention that Cap1 collections department have no arbitration skills whatsoever?) Now, a few months later Cap1 sent my account to West Asset Management, Inc. for collection. I sent them a debt validation letter and they responded to my letter by offering me a settlement? It seems to me they are using a stall tactic in order to have more time to provide me with the proof I requested. Aren't they in violation of the FDCPA regulations by not replying to my DV letter? Please help, I am really trying to do the right thing by trying to repay my debt but the creditor(s) are not willing to work with me.Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chincheck Posted April 29, 2005 Report Share Posted April 29, 2005 Offering a settlement is considered collection activity, which they must not do until they obtain verification and provide you with validation. Draft and send your ITS letter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ibdeujo2 Posted April 29, 2005 Author Report Share Posted April 29, 2005 Thanks for the reply. Now I am curious; what exactly is an ITS letter? Is it along the line of another debt validation letter?Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreatGadsby Posted April 29, 2005 Report Share Posted April 29, 2005 it's an 'intent to sue'. where you tell them how they broke the rules, and you're gonna sue them for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ibdeujo2 Posted April 29, 2005 Author Report Share Posted April 29, 2005 Thanks for the information! I am so on it.Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatGirl Posted August 10, 2005 Report Share Posted August 10, 2005 The same thing just happened to me with the same OC and CA.Did the ITS get a response? Did you go ahead and file suit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ibdeujo2 Posted August 10, 2005 Author Report Share Posted August 10, 2005 Hey thatgirl,Just so happens I was browsing through my "watched topics" today that I seen your question. I hope I can answer this correctly for you, but this is what I had done:I found out who the CFO was of Capital One and wrote to himas I felt it was important for them to know how his corporation is handling their business transactions. Here are his demographics: Richard Fairbanks, Chairman and CEO, 15000 Capital One Drive, Richmond, VA 23238. I encourage you to write to him if you want to get quick results.AFter corresponding with him and explaining my situation; finally, after several CMRRR letters later did he agree to finally settle with me. My balance was $1465 and they settled for $800. The only draw back was that I had to accept a negative notation on my credit profile reflecting, "settlement-paid for less than the full balance." But at least my mortgage broker will see I paid the account.Also, I sent letters to the collection agencies, CMRRR of course, and basically asked them to provide me with their "permissable purpose for pulling my reports if they never validated my debt despite numerous DV letters sent to them." Use the exact verbiage above and they will have no choice but to delete their entries off your credit profile. You also might want to put in there they are violating the FDCPA laws by reporting debt that has not been validated. This process took all of two months but it was well worth it. Now that I think about it, the only CA that responded by mail to me was ASG (account solutions group). West Asset did not reply but deleted their entries.I hope this was helpful information to you. Good Luck.Crap1 Sucks the big one and I hope that I never need to use their services again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
breathing_easier Posted August 10, 2005 Report Share Posted August 10, 2005 it's an 'intent to sue'. where you tell them how they broke the rules, and you're gonna sue them for it.But only send an ITS letter if you really will follow through with a lawsuit. Otherwise, it dilutes your position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
breathing_easier Posted August 10, 2005 Report Share Posted August 10, 2005 Also, I sent letters to the collection agencies, CMRRR of course, and basically asked them to provide me with their "permissable purpose for pulling my reports if they never validated my debt despite numerous DV letters sent to them." Use the exact verbiage above and they will have no choice but to delete their entries off your credit profile. Are you talking about the CA pulling your report for review and creating a had inquiry? That's what the term "permissible purpose" would apply to. If, on the other hand, you're referring to a CA updating a TL once they've received a DV letter then the CA must tell the CRA to mark the TL as "in dispute" until they provide validation. Also, if you dispute the TL with the CRA and the CA verifies the TL with the CRA without first providing you with validation, that is a FDCPA violation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocDon Posted August 10, 2005 Report Share Posted August 10, 2005 BUT.... you can always state you "will be investigating my rights to civil relief in this matter". That doesn't imply a threat of a lawsuit at all, but let's them know that you know they screwed up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
breathing_easier Posted August 10, 2005 Report Share Posted August 10, 2005 BUT.... you can always state you "will be investigating my rights to civil relief in this matter". That doesn't imply a threat of a lawsuit at all, but let's them know that you know they screwed up.Yep, I like that language. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ibdeujo2 Posted August 10, 2005 Author Report Share Posted August 10, 2005 breathing easier and Doc Don you both are so knowledgeable! I hope that I get to be eloquent in my wording just as you are.After reading my response I realized that I had a mouthful to say. However, breathing easier, you were correct; I was referring to the hard inquiry placed on my account by the CA. Neither did the CA update the CRA reflecting "in dispute" once I sent my DV. I was never able to dispute the info with the CRA as two out of three (TU and EXP) of them told me I have to dispute directly through vendor directly. I also want to let you both know that I did not send an ITS because I never intended to do so. I would never initiate an action I would not follow through with; as aforementioned, it would de-value my position.You all rock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
breathing_easier Posted August 11, 2005 Report Share Posted August 11, 2005 However, breathing easier, you were correct; I was referring to the hard inquiry placed on my account by the CA. Neither did the CA update the CRA reflecting "in dispute" once I sent my DV. I was never able to dispute the info with the CRA as two out of three (TU and EXP) of them told me I have to dispute directly through vendor directly.Other than the hard inquiry, is the CA reporting a tradeline on one or all of your reports? If they are, then you would send a DV letter to the CA for that account, wait until you get your CMRRR green card back, and then dispute with the CRA(s). As to hard inquiries, CRAs are notoriously obstinate about investigating those. They will tell you they are not required to investigate hard inquiries and advise you to contact the entity that placed the inquiry, but all here know that their refusal to investigate inquiries is a violation of the FCRA. TU is the worst of the three when it comes to investigating inquiries. As to EQ and EX if you call to dispute the inquiries every now and then you'll get a phone rep who will delete the inquiries on the spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ibdeujo2 Posted August 11, 2005 Author Report Share Posted August 11, 2005 Greetings breathingeasier,I just received your response and I am now going to reply.The CA never reported a TL with TU; they only had a hard inq on my report. When I DV'd them, ASG CA, they never responded to me but they sent my account back to Crap1 because Crap1 began contacting me again. Now that I was finally able to settle the acct with Crap1, I sent a letter to ASG CA asking them what their permissable purpose was for pulling my credit report if they never reported a TL. They finally responded to me and said,"anytime a CA reviews an account that is the PP and is always considered an hard inq. But, as a courtesy, we will have our entry deleted off your profile." Boy, I was so happy because even gaining one FICO point would make the difference of me getting financing for a home loan. I have not checked my reports yet because one of the accounts do not update until the 12th of the month. I will definetly let you know how having that inq deleted off my report has helped my score.Is what the CA said true about hard inq's?breathingeasier, if I began rambling yet again and did not answer the question correctly, please let me know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts