Debt Validation proceedures What is a true DV

[pilotbonsai]

When you request a Validation of Debt what is it that they have to send back? I requested a DV from a collection agency and they sent me a dot matrix printed statement with the stated amount owed crossed out and a larger number hand written next to it.

How Valid is this? and what steps should I take next ( they have posted derogatory credit)?

[codename_fortyseven]

Validation is like obscenity, I can't describe it, but I know it when I see it.

Heh, j/k, but still validation is proof that you owe someone else money.

Got a contract between person x and person y promising to pay amount z?

Good validation. Not much you can do/say, unless the signatures don't match or the contract is invalid due to consideration or something else.

Got an itemized accounting from 0 dollars to amount x and an agreement stipulating the interest rates and such?

Good validation.

Got a letter citing the Chaundry case and an affadavit?

Not good validation.

Got a printout from the CA's computers saying "yup, you owe it."

Not good validation.

Kinda the best of the best and worst of the worst examples, but the CA has to have SOMETHING tying you to the debt. I don't think a final bill will cut it, either.

The CA is supposed to go to the OC, get the complete records of the account, and send the records to you. They can't have the OC send the records to you, and it should be a complete, itemized accounting.

Ever try to keep paper records of something? I don't know about you, but I largely suck at it and so does the rest of the world. Chances are, most records are purged after a year or two, even computer records.

This is where they goof up, since most of them only have a name, account, amount said owed, SSN, and address.

Ask for proof that they owe you something and they start backtracking.

This is even MORE apprarant with JDB's. They typically have NOTHING.

On to your case...

Your dot matrix printout is garbage. It isn't validation, not even close. Why don't you send the CEO a letter stating that they owe you 10x the amount they are claiming? That is pretty much what they sent you. (no, don't really do this)

The hand written part screams amateur night as well. I doubt that would stand up in court as proof you owe anyone anything.

Is this a collection agency, assignee, or JDB?

What are they reporting? Factoring company? Open account? Past 120 days?

Is the OC reporting? If so, does it say "sold to another agency" or something referring to a sale?

Did you dispute the TL after requesting validation?

If not, do it now, so you can get the auto violation of continued collection activity.

What they sent you wasn't validation. If they do anything further from here from calling you, writing you, or verifying a TL that is continued collection activity.

The law says send validation and cease collection until you do. This doesn't mean some garbage printout, some half assed attempt, or anything like that. Validate or don't try to collect a dime. Don't validate, don't try to collect a dime.

[get A·non·y·mous]

How 'bout this:

I sent DV to FCN for old SBC account and recieved politely worded letter stating "Total Amount Due: 0.00", "Principal Due: 0.00" plus enclosures of three monthly statements on the account.

Does this count as validation?

It's especially weird because whereas EFX, TU and the final monthly statment give a $72 balance, their letter to me says that there is a $0 balance due!?

I am completely willing to do a PFD for this, I just DV'd to gain some leverage before offering to settle.

[codename_fortyseven]

It counts as an actionable violation.

If you have 0 due, what are they collection?

If they are reporting something differnent that what they are telling you, dispute, get it verified, then sue.

Do so in writing, CMRRR

[IHateCAs]

Most state Supreme Courts have ruled that proper validation (IE something that will win in court) has to include an itemized listing of all debits, credits, fees and interest. If they don't have that, they got nothing. Send them a complete cease & desist. If they report on your CRA, sue them.

[Methuss]

The official word is that this is an area open to interpretation by courts. There is case-law that swings both ways on this.

Chaudry v. Gallerizzo and Stoneheart v. Rosenthal (4th Circuit) have ruled that a debt collector's validation merely has to be a confirmation in writing that the amount being sought is the same as the original creditor says is owed. This must be proven by the debt collector obtaining proof of the amount from the original creditor and then mailing it to you. The debt collector cannot give you a printout from their own records as such proof. If they do, then they have violated the FDCPA by using deceptive means to collect and by continuing collections without providing validation in the manner the statute requires.

Several other court circuits have stated that proof must be more thorough than above. In Coppolla v. Arrow (2nd Circuit) it was ruled that the collector must be able to prove 1) that the amount is correct (detailed accounting); 2) that they have a right to collect (contract with OC); 3) that they have an ability collect (licensed where required); 4) that collection fees were permitted under the original agreement (original contract with OC); and 5) that the debt is legally collectable (not past SoL). Asset also had to produce a number of additional documents such as a copy of their procedure manual and the real name and address of the collectors involved (no aliases) because it was alleged they violated the FDCPA willfully...

[codename_fortyseven]

Methuss,

That isn't the complete chaundry ruling. The part JDB's overlook follows where it states the OC had already given a running tally of the account.