skip73

ca response to dv....what now?

Recommended Posts

i sent a dv letter to a ca (credit collection services) using a sample letter from here that i tweaked. I received a response stating.............. "in order for us to take further action, we must have from you the information required under 623(a)(8)(D). Specificially, identify the specific information that is being disputed, explain the basis for the dispute and include all supporting documentation to substantiate the basis of the dispute. Pending receipt of this information, we have advised the credit bureaus to whom we report that this account is disputed"....

What the?? I gave them the account # supplied on my credit report and asked for validation.......is this a stall, do i have to provide more info to them, because I know that it is up to them to validate not me! ?????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, they're idiots. You weren't exercising your right under the FCRA (disputing directly w/ the data furnisher) but under the FDCPA instead. Send them a letter back, telling them that you are requesting validation of the debt per the FDCPA §809(B) and not the FCRA. § 623 of the FCRA only gives a consumer the right to ask the furnisher to investigate their specific dispute (as you would do w/ a CRA). Obviously, that's not what you were asking them to do. Also, if they report the account as "in dispute", then they are doing something to adhere to the law. Personally, I think that this is either a stall tactic (gives them more time to create some garbage to mail to you as validation) or they just don't know what in the :censored: they're doing. Seems like you'll have to spell it out for these bozos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok thanx for response, i would have never even realized that....now the 30 days to respond still applies from the time i received the card correct??should i remind them of that??!! thanks angel.!!....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For DV, they don't have to respond to you in 30 days. Actually, they don't have to respond 2 you @ all. But if you request validation w/in 30 days of initial contact, then they must cease collection activity until they provide that validation to you. If you disputed w/ the CRAs after they received your dv request (as soon as they receive it) and they verify the TLs w/o responding to your DV request, then that's a violation (continued collection activity). If they do respond (even if the validation is poor) b4 verifying w/ the CRAs and list the account as "in dispute", then they are in compliance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok perhaps i didnt word that the way i wanted to.. to clarify my question if they(ca) in fact do NOT verify with me afer this 2nd letter i send them, are they in violation if the cra comes back "verified" after the initial 1-2 punch?????? ....

-sent letter to ca

-got green card

-disputed with cra

-received dumb letter from ca

-they fail to validate with me and cra dispute comes back "verified"

-violation!!!!!!????????????

i hope this makes sense, does the second letter i send them (essentially telling them they are idiots) give them a extension of time????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The CA could claim that you didn't request validation per the FDCPA if you didn't clearly state your purpose in the letter. That means if they verify the TL, then it wouldn't be continued collection activity. Just make sure you send a clearer DV request w/in 30 days of the letter they sent you. This would just start the DV process over. Now, if your 1st letter clearly stated that you were asking for validation per the FDCPA, then there's no excuse for their ignorance. Keep the letters. If they verify, then you'll have them on a violation. Send a 2nd letter and be more firm. Just allow the violations to keep piling up to build your case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't have to state a reason. "I dispute" is all that is required.

They are trying to sidestep and go with a FACTA dispute.

I'd be gearing up to sue. You don't have to send them anything, and I wouldn't do anything else, except send em a summons if they continue to collect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's unusual for a CA to report without first notifying you of your verification rights; that is standard policy for most CA's. If you dispute within the 30 days of that initial notification they would normally treat it as a dispute and verification request. My sense is they sent you your verification rights, though you may not have received them.

Outside of that 30 day time frame, they would rightfully handle it as a dispute under facta as they are no longer obligated to verify.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the letter that I sent to all of my CA on Dec 15,06. I received the same letter back as the above person got. :evil: I even got a letter back from Wells Fargo and I never sent them anything?!:confused: thought I covered BOTH set of rules in one letter. But what do I do now?

December 15, 2006

NCO

PO Box 41466

Philadelphia,PA 19101

RE: Account XXXXXXXX

Dear Sir/Madam:

After running my credit report it seems your firm states I have alleged debt. I'm sure you are aware of the provisions in the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), and I am requesting validation of this debt. I am requesting proof that I am indeed the party you are asking to pay this debt, and there is some contractual obligation which is binding on me to pay this debt. I request that you stop contacting us on the telephone and restrict your contact with us to writing, and only when you can provide adequate validation of this alleged debt. To refresh your memory on what constitutes legal validation, I am giving a list of the required documentation:

• Complete payment history, the requirement of which has been established.

• Agreement that bears the signature of the alleged debtor wherein he agreed to pay the original creditor.

• Letter of sale or assignment from the original creditor to your company. (Agreement with your client that grants you the authority to collect on this alleged debt.) 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 to collect debt.

• Intimate knowledge of the creation of the debt by you, the collection agency.

• also provide me with the following information:

• What the money you say I owe is for;

• Explain and show me how you calculated what you say I owe;

• Provide me with copies of any papers that show I agreed to pay what you say I owe;

• Provide a verification or copy of any judgment if applicable;

• Identify the original creditor;

• Prove the Statute of Limitations has not expired on this account

• Show me that you are licensed to collect in my state

• Provide me with your license numbers and Registered Agent

I'm sure you know, under FDCPA Section 809 (B), you are not allowed to pursue collection activity until the debt is validated. You should be made aware that in TWYLA BOATLEY, Plaintiff, vs. DIEM CORPORATION, No. CIV 03-0762 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA, 2004, the courts ruled that reporting a collection account indeed is considered collection activity.

At this time I will also inform you that if your offices have reported invalidated information to any of the 3 major Credit Bureau’s (Equifax, Experian or TransUnion) this action might constitute fraud under both Federal and State Laws. Due to this fact, if any negative mark is found on any of my credit reports by your company or the company that you represent I will not hesitate in bringing legal action against you for the following:

• Violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act

• Violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act

• Defamation of Character

If your offices are able to provide the proper documentation as requested in the following Declaration, I will require at least 30 days to investigate this information and during such time all collection activity must cease and desist.

Also during this validation period, if any action is taken which could be considered detrimental to any of my credit reports, I will consult with my legal counsel for suit. This includes any listing any information to a credit reporting repository that could be inaccurate or invalidated or verifying an account as accurate when in fact there is no provided proof that it is.

If your offices fail to respond to this validation request within 30 days from the date of your receipt, all references to this account must be deleted and completely removed from my credit file and a copy of such deletion request shall be sent to me immediately.

I would also like to request, in writing, that no telephone contact be made by your offices to my home or to my place of employment. If your offices attempt telephone communication with me, including but not limited to computer generated calls and calls or correspondence sent to or with any third parties, it will be considered harassment and I will have no choice but to file suit. All future communications with me MUST be done in writing and sent to the address noted in this letter by USPS.

It would be advisable that you assure that your records are in order before I am forced to take legal action. This is an attempt to correct your records, any information obtained shall be used for that purpose.

While I prefer not to litigate, I will use the courts as needed to enforce my rights under the FDCPA.

I look forward to an uneventful resolution of this matter.

Sincerely,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.