Do you believe this format for proof of debt validation?

[BROTHER]

I went to this site http://www.creditinfocenter.com/rebuild/debt_validation.shtml

I got this link off of here do you believe this format for proof of validation?? I know I asked about the 'assignement letter' in one of my earlier posts , Cause i would wonder if a person/agency has the right or authority to collect on someone elses behalf. Cause if you paid a collection agency, and they did not have the permission from the Original Creditor then How can you go after them and get that money back??

What do they need to provide as debt validation?

Proof that the collection company owns the debt/or has been assigned the debt. (Bob is legally entitled to collect this particular debt from you.) This is basic contract law. You might want to read this article from a collection attorney explaining how difficult it is to get a judgment without a direct contract between collection agency and the original creditor.

Complete payment history, starting with the original creditor. (You need to have proof of your payment history with Joe, what the amount of the debt was when Joe assigned the debt to Bob, and what fees/interest Bob has tacked on to this debt and how he determined these fees.) This requirement was established by the case Fields v. Wilber Law Firm, Donald L. Wilber and Kenneth Wilber, USCA-02-C-0072, 7th Circuit Court, Sept 2004..

Copy of the original signed loan agreement or credit card application. (Your contract with Joe establishing the debt between you.) This is also basic contract law.

[DocDon]

ummm... this is creditinfocenter...

what's the question?

[BROTHER]

ummm... this is creditinfocenter...

what's the question?

I guess you didnt read the first part of my post.

I asked the QUESTION

1) I got this link off of here DO YOU believe this format for proof of validation??

STATEMENT

Cause i would wonder if a person/agency has the right or authority to collect on someone elses behalf.

QUESTION

2)Cause if you paid a collection agency, and they did not have the permission from the Original Creditor then How can you go after them and get that money back??

[DocDon]

I read it. I assumed when you said, "I went to this site:" that you didn't realize you were already at Credit Info Center...

If you paid a CA who never had permission from the OC to collect, then they stole your money. It's fraud. You file a police report, then sue their rears after the criminal part of the investigation is over...

[BROTHER]

Thanks for the response, but what about my FIRST QUESTION.

DO YOU believe this format for proof of validation??

[DocDon]

Better question is what shortcomings, if any, do you see with it?

[BROTHER]

Turn you tables on me lol

Short commings??? hmmm well i was just wondering about the part about assignment.

Proof that the collection company owns the debt/or has been assigned the debt. (Bob is legally entitled to collect this particular debt from you.) This is basic contract law. You might want to read this article from a collection attorney explaining how difficult it is to get a judgment without a direct contract between collection agency and the original creditor.

I want to soo HARD to believe this is TRUE, that they have to SEND a copy of the ASSIGNMENT letter (Even though i believe its just common sense but courts dont always work on common sense).

But where in the FDCPA does it say that?? Or is there ANY CASE LAW that say that? Please answer.

[DocDon]

Here's one example for JDB's:

Coppola v. Arrow Financial Services, 302CV577, 2002 WL 32173704(D.Conn., Oct. 29, 2002) – Information relating to the purchase of a bad debt is not proprietary or burdensome. Debtor must phrase their request clearly to obtain: The source of a debt and the amount a bad debt buyer paid for plaintiff’s debt, how amount sought was calculated, where in issue a list of reports to credit bureaus, and documents conferring authority on defendant (Arrow Financial) to collect debt.

Here's the UCC:

§ 9-406. DISCHARGE OF ACCOUNT DEBTOR; NOTIFICATION OF ASSIGNMENT; IDENTIFICATION AND PROOF OF ASSIGNMENT; RESTRICTIONS ON ASSIGNMENT OF ACCOUNTS, CHATTEL PAPER, PAYMENT INTANGIBLES, AND PROMISSORY NOTES INEFFECTIVE.

(a) [Discharge of account debtor; effect of notification.]

Subject to subsections ( through (i), an account debtor on an account, chattel paper, or a payment intangible may discharge its obligation by paying the assignor until, but not after, the account debtor receives a notification, authenticated by the assignor or the assignee, that the amount due or to become due has been assigned and that payment is to be made to the assignee. After receipt of the notification, the account debtor may discharge its obligation by paying the assignee and may not discharge the obligation by paying the assignor.

( [When notification ineffective.]

Subject to subsection (h), notification is ineffective under subsection (a):

(1) if it does not reasonably identify the rights assigned;

(2) to the extent that an agreement between an account debtor and a seller of a payment intangible limits the account debtor's duty to pay a person other than the seller and the limitation is effective under law other than this article; or

(3) at the option of an account debtor, if the notification notifies the account debtor to make less than the full amount of any installment or other periodic payment to the assignee, even if:

(A) only a portion of the account, chattel paper, or general intangible has been assigned to that assignee;

( a portion has been assigned to another assignee; or

© the account debtor knows that the assignment to that assignee is limited.

© [Proof of assignment.]

Subject to subsection (h), if requested by the account debtor, an assignee shall seasonably furnish reasonable proof that the assignment has been made. Unless the assignee complies, the account debtor may discharge its obligation by paying the assignor, even if the account debtor has received a notification under subsection (a).

[BROTHER]

Thanks for the Info, Just WHAT I was looking for!!

So when we use debt Validation, we have to specifically request a copy of the assignment letter?? I guess i didnt dispute a debt right,

I just told them i 'Dispute the validity' of the debt and that i do NOT owe a debt. I also request the name and address of the creditor.

basically just what the FDCPA says.

So from now we have to specifically request an assignment letter or proof of it. I would think they would give it automatically, but oh well i dont get paid to think. LOL . Let me know if im understanding right about specifically asking for the proof of assignment.

[BROTHER]

oh by the way, what does JDB mean??? I dont know all these abreviations yet. im still new.

[Pooh]

JDB=Junk Debt Buyer. They buy uncollected debts for pennies on the dollar and attempt to collect in full.

There is a sticky on the main discussion page that has the most commonly used abbreviations.

[jasen]

This has always been a grey area. There is no true definition of "validation", it seems to be determined on a case by case basis by the courts.

The fact is, they don't have to validate, (exception being they must validate before further collection attemps if you dispute within the first 30 days of initial contact, otherwise they don't *have* to do anything) and don't have to validate in any specific standard, format, or method if they do. The only time the validation really being important is if you go to court. At that time they'll have to prove that they own the debt, that you owe it, etc. And having some of these cases on your side as precedent will certainly help you there.

I've never relied on the DV to really do anything, other than annoy them, and as a precedent to ask the CRA for a method of verifcation request. I have not once had a CA answer a DV, but then I've also never been to court with one.

[BROTHER]

Thanks for response.

Im in a middle of something now, I had a collection agency claim they had cancled an account per their clients request BEFORE they reported the debt to the credit bureaus.

They sent me a collection letter, i called them and imediately sent a dispute letter to them. They got it and then sent me some so called 'validation' just a rental agreement and a copy of a bill from landlord and of course the interest they were charging.

I had paid this over 3 years ago and i got proof from the bank and copy of the check cashed with his signature on it!! As soon as i got their letter i told the landlord they made a mistake, I had paid him 3 years ago. He gave me a letter stating it was paid in full and HE had to call the collection agency (they never contacted Him) to tell them to cancel it. So it should NOT have ever showed up at all on my credit report. It was resolved in less than 12 days from start to finish.

3 months later, it shows up as a account disputed. lowers my score and now im after them.

First they claim its just a 'belief' that i feel its on their, then they claim they talked with the credit bureau and credit bureaus said they did not show an account listed from them on my cr. Of course when I talk with them (cb) they said no such thing. of course i got a copy of the report that shows the account.

Now they claim it is 'listed' correctly cause it says i disputed it 3 months ago and it shows as disputed. I let them know that you can CONTINUE to report it as disputed if it was already closed.

You opinion, do you see how many violations are here??

[Ravenous Wolf]

I have never liked the phrase:

I dispute the validity of this debt.

For me, it is like, yeah... so what else is new... It is just very vague to me as if it is almost a statement instead of a protest. In fact, I have noticed that some letters that people write are very vague letters to collectors, the CRAs, and to creditors.

Instead, it should direct and explicit like:

This [credit item/debt/listing, etc] is [see below] and [see below].

wrong

incorrect

inaccurate

erroneous

mistaken

flawed

In fact, I have several tables of terminology (for different issues) that I used in all my letters. My letters are explicit and direct.

[Cep2535]

I sent my first DV out today

I used the generic letter found here

http://www.creditinfocenter.com/forms/sampleletter9.shtml

Changed it a bit, but i think its get the point across well. Once i see the response from this i will probaly start work on my own.

[mcb11902]

I want to preface my comment by saying that I agree, the CA must prove they have the right to collect a debt. I just don't think you should cite UCC 9-406 when asking them to prove they have a right to collect. UCC 9-406 refers to secured transactions; credit cards are unsecured transactions.