Jump to content

Sherman/LVNV/Alegis and Hanna & Assocs.


Recommended Posts

Check this thread for the history on what is becoming an increasingly weird situation.

Now, on top of Alegis sending me a letter purporting to be a response toa verification request I have never sent, I get, after several phone calls from them, a letter from Hanns & associates in Marietta, GA, stating the following:

"Please be advised that LVNV Funding LLC has purchased the above referenced account from Sears - Citi-Sears[sic]. This law firm represents LVNV Funding LLC regarding your dispute. Please contact this office in order that we may help you resolve this."

Unlike Alegis, they follow this up with a valid mini-miranda. The letter was dated 6/17/05. I DV'd Alegis yesterday in response to their letter, but obviously that has not been received yet; that is the only dispute in existence, however.

A few question still exist here:

1. To date I have received no communication from LVNV directly claiming possession of the debt. Do the letters from Alegis and Hanna constitute such communication, or can I tell them to stuff it until I get such notice? Yes, I know Alegis and LVNV are part of the same corporation, but that is not knowable from the letters, and in order to use the corporate designations LP and LLC they must be independently formed and registered (and if not, that would be a violation in its own right).

2. I DV'd Alegis (and denied their affidavit), but should I also send separate DVs to LVNV and Hanna, or just notify them of the existing DV? I see from other threads that Hanna is in the habit of rejecting DVs, so pre-empting that may be useful.

3. Since Alegis violated my FDCPA rights by failing to mini-mirandize me, is it also a violation to sic an attorney on me? That is, is any further collection activity invalidated by earlier violations?

4. Is it a violation to claim falsely that a dispute exists? It sure strikes me as a false and misleading representation. And is that further a violation of legal ethics for an attorney to be party to such a claim?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. To date I have received no communication from LVNV directly claiming possession of the debt. Do the letters from Alegis and Hanna constitute such communication, or can I tell them to stuff it until I get such notice?

Sherman/LVNV will NOT communicate with you directly, they farm your account out to their flunkies and affiliates and you must deal with THEM. Besides, they are not required to tell you they've bought your debt.

Sherman/LVNV buys junk debts. Their habit is to then assign it a succession of collection agencies, including their own, until one of them gets you to pay or they decide to sue you. I had 3 debts with Sherman. I 3 years, I've been thru no less than 5 CA's on EACH account, including Alegis at least once on each one. They keep shuffling the deck and you have to DV EACH successor CA. They expect they'll wear you down, I think, or you give up and pay, or they sue you.

is it also a violation to sic an attorney on me? That is, is any further collection activity invalidated by earlier violations?

Nope. What Sherman has done is to try to AVOID the DV issue by having it sent to their sharks a Hanna and company. Its also possible they PULLED it from Alegis and gave it to Hanna as a 'new' CA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have had the same thing happen with Sherman/Alegis... now LVNV. I am just trying to wait out the SOL. It is my understanding that with each new CA, i.e. Hanna in this case, they must send an initial letter with the mini-miranda and the statement about the 30 days to request validation.

They basically start over every time Sherman/LVNV sends the account to a new CA. Like Lady, mine has been everywhere under the sun and I haave DV'd each time. I never hear from them again and the cycle eventually starts over. Obviously they can't validate and just keep sending it to new CA's. So DV them every time they start over.

I do have a question for Lady.. or someone. Can a CA sue without contacting you first? I don't mean initial contact in the form of a summons but a dunning letter with the mini-miranda, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm. Well, I already have Alegis on a mini-miranda violation and have DV'd them, so I really don't care if they are collecting any more or not.

Today, Hanna called while I was out and spoke at length to my wife, using abusive language, threatening suit, and also refusing to communicate only in writing. Unfortunately my wife did not record the call - is her affidavit or testimony sufficient evidence? In any event, they will be DV'd come Monday too.

I'm about 18 months from SOL and am quite happy to DV over and over, but I think it's time to have my attorney put the screws on them.

If they pull this stunt regularly, do they ever come back to a previously hired CA? And if so, if that CA has not validated under an earlier request, that presumably is a violation too, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do have a question for Lady.. or someone. Can a CA sue without contacting you first? I don't mean initial contact in the form of a summons but a dunning letter with the mini-miranda, etc.

They can sue that way, but if they do then the papers you are seved with MUST include the mini-miranda AND the 30-days to dispute language.

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.