Ffico Posted March 19, 2007 Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 I have DV the CA (Credit One LLC) and written to the CRA both without any success. I have read of the successess that of many on this board, yet I am feeling that me getting this removed is impossible. Any advice is appreciated. Each time it comes back: validated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recovering Attorney Posted March 19, 2007 Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 If you have disputed with both the CA and the CRA, and you havenot heard from the CA but the CRA says "verified," dispute with the CRA again, showing that you sent a demand to the CA but it hasn't answered you. And ifi it hasn't answered you, how could they verify? I.e., the info the CRA is showing is inaccurate and unverified since the CA has not owned up to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ffico Posted March 19, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 If you have disputed with both the CA and the CRA, and you havenot heard from the CA but the CRA says "verified," dispute with the CRA again, showing that you sent a demand to the CA but it hasn't answered you. And ifi it hasn't answered you, how could they verify? I.e., the info the CRA is showing is inaccurate and unverified since the CA has not owned up to you.The CA responding that they needed more time - 6 months ago. They have stopped all collection activity outside of reporting to the CRAs. So, should I write or call the CRAs to ask how did they verify? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
divemedic Posted March 19, 2007 Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 verifying with the CRA when they cannot validate or verify with you is illegal under both the FDCPA and the FCRA, as well as many state's laws. Threaten suit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ffico Posted March 19, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 verifying with the CRA when they cannot validate or verify with you is illegal under both the FDCPA and the FCRA, as well as many state's laws. Threaten suit.Dive, should I attempt to get them to validate again? Or, should I dispute with the CRAs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
divemedic Posted March 19, 2007 Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 write them, point out that they cannot be verifying a TL if they don't have the papers to prove it, and then redispute. If they verify, sue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ffico Posted March 19, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 write them, point out that they cannot be verifying a TL if they don't have the papers to prove it, and then redispute. If they verify, sue.Isn't is risky to give these clowns another opportunity to validate. I would think it would be better just to go to the CRAs. I am a novice and will defer to the experts but, I thought once they couldn't validate that was all that was needed. This is driving me mad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
divemedic Posted March 19, 2007 Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 Readhttp://www.creditinfocenter.com/legal/FDCPA.shtml#813Which says (in part):( In determining the amount of liability in any action under subsection (a), the court shall consider, among other relevant factors -- (1) in any individual action under subsection (a)(2)(A), the frequency and persistence of noncompliance by the debt collector, the nature of such noncompliance, and the extent to which such noncompliance was intentional; or (2) in any class action under subsection (a)(2)(, the frequency and persistence of noncompliance by the debt collector, the nature of such noncompliance, the resources of the debt collector, the number of persons adversely affected, and the extent to which the debt collector's noncompliance was intentional.You want a good number of violations, not only because of that, but to torpedo any possible "bona fide error" defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IngridA Posted March 19, 2007 Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 Does it make any difference whether or not the OP's DV request was timely? I thought that if it was untimely, the CA could ignore the DV request and go about their business...??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
divemedic Posted March 19, 2007 Report Share Posted March 19, 2007 I do not think that is true in this case- they sent the OP a letter stating that they needed more time to get the information. This indicates that they do not have the required information to verify this account with the debtor. If they don't have it, then how are they verifying with the CRA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts