Jump to content

When precisely does debt validation end?


Recommended Posts

One can partially infer congresional intent in regards to debt validation.

Consumer requests debt validation--meanwhile collection efforts are frozen. Collector is motivated to provide debt validation so they promptly comply and provide debt validation. Properly cowed consumer realises resistance is futile and pays collector. Or properly caught collector realises their bluff is called and folds. But assuming the consumer did the DV within the 30 day period, until the collector responds the consumer is in debt validation.

A few slips between cup and lip between the real world and the ideal world in the case where the collector is not the OC.

Often PROPER debt validation cannot be obtained from the OC---but the collector will still try to SNEAK something past the uneducated consumer that does not rise to a proper debt validation standard. If the consumer bites, in theory, they are out of debt validation-----collection efforts can resume.

Now, if a more informed consumer receives such a piece of inadequate debt validation, something they are pretty certain would not hold up in court, and then writes or calls the collector that this is not adequate debt validation for specific reason a, b, c----the collector is somewhat within their legal rights to maintain it is adequate debt validation.--even if they know they will likely get clobbered if they use the courts to enforce payment and the consumer shows up to contest.----Meanwhile collection efforts can resume.----and the CA uses their tradeline on the CRA's to intimidate the consumer into paying.--ya wanna get a mortgage--forget it until I get paid.

Of course the downside risk for the collector is that the consumer will use the courts to sue the collector who certainly should know what they sent in regard to debt validation is not acceptable.------but short of court action is there any rights of the consumer to remain in debt validation while their

legitimate or illegitimate objections to initial debt validation is processed?

Or is the debt validation period over once the collector answers with anything however inadequate? Can any provide precise answers for this somewhat vague question?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you pretty much answered your own question there, somewher.

What constitutes proper debt validation is pretty much up to the courts to decide. There are of course guidelines, but there have been just as many cases saying the "debt stated" affadavit is valide as there have been those requiring a signed contract.

I think most CAs will fold up and go away when confronted with what appears to be an informed consumer. Its simply too easy to pick on the poor smuch who just coughs up money. Those CAs that are willing to litigate still expect the consumer to not show...and therefore they'll get a default judgement.

IMHO, the purpose of debt validation is to chase away the CAs that don't want to work too hard, and to catch the others in FDCPA or FCRA violations so that you can take THEM to court.

The point is...it depends on who wants to put the most effort into it...you or the CA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply willingtocope,

But I assume then that "while you are in debt validation period" ends the minute the collector send you anything in regards to debt validation.

And can't be restarted by the consumer disputing funky validation.

Our omnipetent lawmakers in actions--those friendly folks who brought us the national debt and the S&L bailout they caused.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think so. Numerous court decisions have said that they must cease collection efforts after receiving a timely DV, and may not resume until validation is sent. If what is sent does not meet the standard to be considered validation, then validation was not sent. Validation is not what the consumer says it is, nor is it what the CA says it is. Validation is what the COURT says it is.

If you feel that the CA has not provided validation, sue and let the court decide.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
I don't think so. Numerous court decisions have said that they must cease collection efforts after receiving a timely DV, and may not resume until validation is sent. If what is sent does not meet the standard to be considered validation, then validation was not sent. Validation is not what the consumer says it is, nor is it what the CA says it is. Validation is what the COURT says it is.

If you feel that the CA has not provided validation, sue and let the court decide.

Can you clarify "validation is what the COURT says it is" I have searched the web and credit repair books and heard a few diff versions of what "DV" is. Would you mind telling what documents prove DV to a federal judge?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

growingupbnunnie: There's a pretty good discussion of the whole thing in the "Debt Validation" menu item at the top of the page...

http://www.creditinfocenter.com/rebuild/debt_validation.shtml

...there are some court cases references, which is what would ultimately settle the question. The point is that a consumer (or his/her attorney) would have to come to court armed with those citations in order to convince an otherwise FDCPA/FTC/FCRA ingnorant judge of what other courts have decided.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty hard to argue with what willingtocope says.

My comment is thats its a pretty sad state of affairs in that no real conressional guidance has been provided.-----so ultimately the courts decide

inconsistantly on a case by case basis.

It has to be my guess that most debt validation matters rest on that slippery slope-----with both sides in limbo----the collector can't provide enough to feel they have a slam dunk case for court--the consumer meanwhile is in a similar limbo and their best hope is catching the CA in some sort of a collection violation not really relevant to the actual facts of debt validation. So you get ill feelings all around with limbo the usual fate of all lost souls on either side of the divide.------but meanwhile the collector continues to use the

credit rating system to provide the needed levargae.````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````

Now we have new laws in the areas of bankruptcy and the 1099 issue with similar idealistic congressional intent language that will ultimately be fleshed out in courts---and its no rocket science to predict there will soon be new limbos to be lost in.------the ultimate question is how high this vague ediface can be built before something collaspes under the weight of its own absurdie.

Sorry for the rant But just still my comment on that sad state of affairs

when the CA provides less than solid debt validation

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.