Time Tables for DV's?

[petr3772]

I have read this on here a bunch... That if you DV after the 30 day window the CA doesn't have to respond. I went and read the FDCPA and in regards to this... "If the consumer notifies the debt collector in writing within the thirty-day period described in subsection"... However no where does it state that if you miss that 30 day window that they do not have to respond. ALSO CA never send things CMRRR so how can they prove your validation was not sent with in that time frame? Any thoughts?

[MadinKS]

Excellent question. Waiting for the pros on this though.

[divemedic]

Where the law is mute, there is no law. For example, the law does not say that you can't eat a cheeseburger, nor does it say that you must eat a cheeseburger. Therefore, you may or may not eat a cheeseburger, it is up to you.

Get it?

[MadinKS]

Just got off the phone with the FTC. Seems if you miss the 30 day window the CA's are not required to validate. Bummer.

[divemedic]

Did you think we make this stuff up?

Just kidding, don't take anyone's word- always confirm!!!

[MadinKS]

Sometimes a CA attempts to dodge DV’s by refusing to sign for them. When the letter is returned to you, save it to use as evidence later, and then resend it by FEDEX with delivery confirmation. More expensive, to be sure, but most companies will sign for FEDEX without a second thought. When the green cards come back, immediately request reinvestigation from the CRA. This does one of three things (if you are dealing with a CA):

1 They don’t validate, and they don’t reply to the CRA. Deletion. You win.

2 They don’t validate, they verify with CRA. Violation. Proceed to next step.

3 They validate accurately, either with or without verifying to the CRA. Very rare. Only happened once so far for me. They just don’t keep good enough records. You negotiate pay for delete in this case. If they won’t PFD, then let it lie. Don’t waste your money getting “settled in full” or other nonsense. It empties your bank account and trashes your credit.

This quote was taken from your sticky in credit repair. Did you DV all the accounts within the 30 days or much later like most of us are preparing to do? Even if they don't verify (because they are not obligated) and they verify to the CRA's are we in the same boat? I guess what I'm saying is: If they are not required by law to respond to a DV after the 30 days, are we spinning our wheels or can that be used in court? Thanks.

MadinKS

[divemedic]

I did many of them outside the 30 days.

First, the FDCPA states that in response to a timely DV, the CA must cease collection activity until validation is sent. Reporting to the CRA is considered to be collection activity. Therefore, in response to a timely DV, the CA cannot report to the CRA. Many CA's claim that they already reported the TL, so if they do nothing, the TL remains. That is how the 1-2 punch works. You force them to either break the law or allow the delete.

However, the courts have also held that a DV that is not timely does not force the CA to cease collection. Therefore, in order to comply with the law, the CA merely has to ignore your DV, and they are in compliance. Since you waited until the 30 days passed, the CA never has to respond to you. (In effect) They legally can continue to report and collect. Sure they eventually have to validate, but since there is no limit to how long they can take to do so, nor is there any restriction on their activities in the meantime, they will just not do it.

To get the CA on a violation, you have to adopt a different tactic. First off, send your DV. Even though the CA does not have to respond, they still might screw up and tell you something that is against the law, or that strengthens your argument later.

Next, dispute with the CRA. To understand what the legal responsibilities of the CA are, read below. When the TL comes back verified, (and it will) you compare everything that you can prove about the debt to what was verified as being "complete and accurate" by the CA when they responded to the CRA in regards to your dispute. If any of it is contradictory, incomplete, or inaccurate, you have them on FCRA violations.

( Duties of furnishers of information upon notice of dispute.

(1) In general. After receiving notice pursuant to section 611(a)(2) [§ 1681i] of a dispute with regard to the completeness or accuracy of any information provided by a person to a consumer reporting agency, the person shall

(A) conduct an investigation with respect to the disputed information;

( review all relevant information provided by the consumer reporting agency pursuant to section 611(a)(2) [§ 1681i];

© report the results of the investigation to the consumer reporting agency;

(D) if the investigation finds that the information is incomplete or inaccurate, report those results to all other consumer reporting agencies to which the person furnished the information and that compile and maintain files on consumers on a nationwide basis; and

(E) if an item of information disputed by a consumer is found to be inaccurate or incomplete or cannot be verified after any reinvestigation under paragraph (1), for purposes of reporting to a consumer reporting agency only, as appropriate, based on the results of the reinvestigation promptly--

(i) modify that item of information;

(ii) delete that item of information; or

(iii) permanently block the reporting of that item of information.

[petr3772]

that doesn't answer my question... how do they prove they sent it to you if they dont CMRRR the orginal to you? Seems like a technicality but mail does get lost. if you simply said "i never recieved it" how can they prove you wrong? seems like to me they have to respond to the DV unless they have a RR that says they sent you the orginal request. in which case can't you just proceed to step two? are you better forgoing your 30 window so they will think they don't have to respond and get them that way???

[petr3772]

divemedic - what about when they don't contact you and stick it on your credit report and wait for you to call them? have they found a loop hole there? i mean most people do not check thier CR's till they have been turned down for credit or are made aware from a 3rd party.

[MadinKS]

I'm just trying to wade through all this and get a good game plan. Still a little confusing but seeing a little better. Thanks.

[divemedic]

that doesn't answer my question... how do they prove they sent it to you if they dont CMRRR the orginal to you? Seems like a technicality but mail does get lost. if you simply said "i never recieved it" how can they prove you wrong? seems like to me they have to respond to the DV unless they have a RR that says they sent you the orginal request. in which case can't you just proceed to step two? are you better forgoing your 30 window so they will think they don't have to respond and get them that way???

The courts have ruled that they don't have to prove that you got it. They don't even have to prove they sent it. All they have to testify is that they have a policy in place that would make sure it had PROBABLY been sent.

[divemedic]

divemedic - what about when they don't contact you and stick it on your credit report and wait for you to call them? have they found a loop hole there? i mean most people do not check thier CR's till they have been turned down for credit or are made aware from a 3rd party.

They will probably SAY they sent you a letter. Since you can't prove they didn't...

[MadinKS]

petr3772,

sorry for interrupting.

[ghorn]

First of all I just want to say hello to everyone. I just recently found this site and I think it's very informative with a lot of people willing to help. Just so I'm straight on the timeframe involved in DV, here's my question. I have 4 or 5 negative TL's with CA's. They're pretty old (3-4 yrs) and I'm not sure if I rec'd anything from the CA or not. My question is since mine are so old, way past the 30 days, will I now be unable to use the DV process described on this site?

[MadinKS]

Welcome ghorn. From what I have gleaned from the week or so I have been researching and posting on this site is, no, you can still DV but after the initial "30 day" timeframe is up (probably long ago), the CA's are not required by Federal law to respond. That doesn't prevent you from trying though. Some may respond and some might not. It's a big crap shoot. The one good thing I did find in the FDCRA is under section 809. It states "© The failure of a consumer to dispute the validity of a debt under this section may not be construed by any court as an admission of liability by the consumer. So, even if you didn't catch the 30 day period you are not saying to the court it is indeed your debt. Hope that helps but can't trust just me. I'm a newbie too!

MadinKS