Jump to content

Was It Verified?


griffiscustoms
 Share

Recommended Posts

I sent DV to AFNI regarding a Charter cable bill from 2001? I think

This is what I got

Dear Valued Customer,

This is in response to your recent inquiry regarding Afni account number XXXXXXXXXXXX-XX. We have verified with the creditor the following information:

Creditor: Charter Communicatio

Original Creditor: Charter Communicatio

12405 Powerscourt Drive

St Louis, MO 63132

Creditor Account # XXXXXXXXXXXXX

Balance; $281.89

This letter serves as verification of the debt. Upon mailing of this letter, in accordance with 15 USC 1692g. Afni will resume collection activities.

If you have any questions blah blah blah

SO WHAT SHOULD I DO???????????

Aren't they supposed to show me more than this for verification??? I did not get any proof showing how they calculated amount owed, no original agreement or contract, they did not mention statute of limitations, no proof of them being licensed to collect in my state (nor the one the debt was originally in) and no license number, etc.

Should I mail the above statement to them? I mean aren't they SUPPOSED TO give me ALL OF THAT if I requested it?

or

Should I try and settle for delete? ....it had to have been around 2001 that I created this, but they keep updating info with the CRA's so the dates are as recent as this year now, I don't think it'll ever get "wiped off" of my reports at this rate

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off, many courts would consider what you've been sent as proper validation under the letter of the FDCPA. Is that enough? Hard to tell, but the only way you'll know for sure is go to court.

Now...if both the OC and the CA are on your CRs...and the CA is showing a different "date of first delinquency", then you may have a case against them for "reaging" the debt...and, its possible that using the OC's DOFD would show that this is beyond the SOL. But, again, you'd have to go to court to make any use of that.

My suggestion would be to contact the OC...play the "oh gee, I just found you on my CRs...I forgot all about this...where do I send the money?...will you please fix my credit report." If they've sold the debt to the CA...or if they redirect you to the CA, then think long and hard about sending the CA any money. You can't trust them to do the right thing...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My argument would be in two parts.

a) The statute requires a copy be made of the information being sent by the creditor to the CA. That means if the creditor faxes info to the CA, a copy of that fax must be made. How is a consumer to know that the CA truly verified that information with the creditor? There must be something that a consumer can see that clearly came from the creditor in order to make a comparison to the claims being made by the CA. The legislators wrote that into the statute to protect consumers from a CA just restating their demand as verification. The consumer must know on no uncertain terms that the verification information came FROM the creditor. It's the duty of the CA to ensure that the creditor provided proper information in a proper format. If not, they can either request the information come in a more appropriate format, or return the account to the OC. They incur no liability that way.

B) This fails the verification test stated in Guerrro v RJM Acquisitions. What charges comprise that lump sum balance? The amount of the debt MAY have been verified (assuming that balance is entirely principal), but not the nature of the charges and the dates those charges were incurred. How do you know Charter didn't continue to charge for months after you moved? How do you know Charter isn't claiming unreturned equipment that you have proof was returned? This doesn't even prove that you are the right debtor. WHERE were these services rendered? You need an accounting of the balance, a date services/goods were received, a description of the services/goods received and a location services/goods were received.

So if I were you (and I'm not), I'd do the following:

Are they reporting?

If so, have they notated in the TL that the consumer disputes?

If not, dispute the fact that there is no dispute notation.

What is the date of 1st maj. delinquency being reported to Equifax?

If it's blank or later than 2001, dispute that with Equifax.

Look at the fall-off dates for TU/EX. If the fall-off dates are later than 2008, dispute that with TU/EX.

Dispute the balance as well.

Wait and document continued collections by the CA. If that letter fails as verification, any attempt to collect is a violation of 1692g assuming your dispute was timely.

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.