Please critique my C&D letter to ERC

[gbe]

They've been calling again without sending anything via the mail (they claim they've sent it to an old address of mine, but there is no way to possibly know that for sure.). I have spoken with them in the past via phone to tell them to send me something in writing (2 weeks ago - they still have not done so). As the account is out of SOL for Louisiana, at this point I think just a C&D would be more than sufficient. This is what I came up with - I tried to make it short and to the point:

""I have received numerous telephone messages from your company in the past week. These messages have been left on my cellular phone as well as my home phone.

Pursuant to 15 USC 1692c© CEASING COMMUNICATION, you are hereby notified to cease further communication with me regarding the above referenced account except as provided for by law. Your notice is complete upon receipt of this communication.

Be aware that all incoming telephone calls are logged and all telephone conversations are recorded.""

Thoughts? Should I DV them instead, and then C&D them?

[zfire]

I believe you should add that the account is SOL.

DV sounds like a good idea to me.

[stancil1]

Your C&D is ok, but if you can make a timely DV and the SOL has expired, make sure that you do so. From what you've written, you only have 2 weeks left for a timely DV if their first call was your initial contact and they didn't send you a dunning letter.

D

[gbe]

Your C&D is ok, but if you can make a timely DV and the SOL has expired, make sure that you do so. From what you've written, you only have 2 weeks left for a timely DV if their first call was your initial contact and they didn't send you a dunning letter.

The trick with the timely DV is that it would be timely only in my view - they're of the opinion that they've sent many things to me in the past (like I said, to an obselete address, so I've never received anything from them). Would a DV in this instance still be useful?