Jump to content

does DV actually increase risk of lawsuit?


Recommended Posts

I'm just really confused on what to do. On one hand, I feel that DV would help. On the other, I can't help but feel like I am somewhat opening a can of worms so to speak. Does anyone else think like that? or am I alone on this?[/quote

You can get suid if you do nothing. I have a judgment from a oc. I ignored all correspondence from the CAs phone and written. I didnt have another try to sui me until after sol. I think the reason I didnt get sued by others is because I never communicated with them. The one that got a judgment was in the same city as me. The one past sol was in the same state. I've heard not to DV unless out of SOL.

If they call you and harass you record them on the phone. you may have cause for a counter suit(s) What is your sol.

You may want to after you DV them and if they validate do a pfd.

you can negotiate with them. I had offers from CA's as low as 25%

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It does depend on who you DV. Some of the CAs that Citibank hands things over to, will not take kindly to a DV.

Citibank, will in some cases, then take the debtor to court. They often provide the CA with everything they need to validate the debt, records, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's my opinion:

(Remember, we're talking about the CA...not the OC).

The DV process has nothing to do with whether you owe somebody money or not. It's all about making the CA prove that they have the right person, the right account, the right amount, and the right to collect in your state. If you send them a DV, and they don't send you that proof, but instead repond with a lawsuit, you take the DV to court and say "your honor, I don't know these people and they didn't obey the FDCPA." Will you win? Don't know. But if you do nothing and they sue, you'll lose for sure.

And again, IMHO, the information that CitiBank's CAs are more likely to sue than others seems to began with posts from someone who has a vested interest in getting people to settle with CitiBank. IMHO, some OCs (Citi, AMEX, Discover) are more likely than others to sue WHILE THEY STILL ARE TRYING TO COLLECT THE ACCOUNTS THEMSELVES. Once they turn the account over to a CA, the CAs are the same slimly and incompent bottom feeders every other OC uses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, remember if the OC still owns the debt, that a CA can only sue on behalf of an OC...so in both cases, its the OC suing you.

What happens if they win? They get a judgement that MIGHT allow them to put a lien on your propertery, or attach you bank account, or garnishee your wages. On the other hand, maybe nothing other than a judgement trade line is added to your credit reports. It depends on what they ask for.

On the other hand, if the debt is really owned by a JDB, then they generally don't want to go to court and use "sue" as a threat. If they do sue and win, then the same things could happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I look at it this way:

You use the DV to protect yourself from identity theft. If someone ever got hold of a copy of your credit report and you have bad credit, they can attempt to collect the debts from you and have no right to them. So it is proper to DV always. I dont think there is a judge in any jurisdiction which could argue that point.

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.