ACA trying to collect on a bad check..

[merkurfan]

The check ended up with Certegy 2 years ago for about 200 dollars. They send countless letters (gee I hope I can find one) they looked a lot like they came from the county sheriffs office. I blew them off. (I did this before I found this site) They ARE on my report as Certegy for 234 dollars. ACA however wants 361 dollars. Does not explain the extra charges.

DV is on it's way tomorrow. anyone know how they can play the jack my bill game when minnesota law is 30 bucks over face value??

This is their first dunning letter so I am sure a timly DV will stop them dead in their tracks for a while or kick it back to certegy.

[merkurfan]

Little more info.. Their letter is a volation of state law (missing the required text "this company is a lincensed bill collector in the state of Minnesota), they do not have a minnesota license. They claim the check was issued to Certegy, it was not. They also are asking for a amount that exeeds the state maximum for a bad check. Boy are the in for a rude awakening.

[myscoresawful]

*BUMP*

Merk, did you have any luck getting this removed?

I have a Certegy check collection on my report that I am trying to get rid off.

Thanks!

[merkurfan]

My timely DV made them go away. Centrgy was only on EQ and they fell with a dispute. I still can't write a check at a place that uses them but with all the TL's below and my debit.. I don't write checks anymore

[Methuss]

Minnesota's bad check law reads:

( If the amount of the dishonored check is not paid within 30 days after the payee or holder has mailed notice of

dishonor pursuant to section 609.535 and a description of the penalties contained in this subdivision, whoever issued the

dishonored check is liable to the payee or holder of the check for:

(1) the amount of the check, the service charge as provided in paragraph (a), plus a civil penalty of up to $100 or the

value of the check, whichever is greater. The civil penalty may not be imposed until 30 days following the mailing of the notice

of dishonor. A payee or holder of the check may make a written demand for payment of the civil liability by sending a copy of this section and a description of the liability contained in this section to the issuer's last known address. Notice as

provided in paragraph (a) must also include notification that additional civil penalties will be imposed for dishonored checks

for nonpayment after 30 days;

(2) interest at the rate payable on judgments pursuant to section 549.09 on the face amount of the check from the date of dishonor; and

(3) reasonable attorney fees if the aggregate amount of dishonored checks issued by the issuer to all payees within a

six-month period is over $1,250.

Notice of nonpayment or dishonor that includes a citation to this section and section 609.535, and a description of the penalties contained in these sections, shall be sent by the payee or holder of the check to the drawer by certified mail, return receipt requested, or by regular mail, supported by an affidavit of service by mailing, to the address printed or written on the check. The issuance of a check with an address printed or written on it is a representation by the drawer that the address is the correct address for receipt of mail concerning the check. Failure of the drawer to receive a regular or certified mail notice sent to that address is not a defense to liability under this section, if the drawer has had actual notice for 30 days that the check has been dishonored.

An affidavit of service by mailing shall be retained by the payee or holder of the check.

So ACA is trying to collect more than they are permitted under law. Unless the original payee of the check mailed you a certified return receipt letter demanding restitution for the bounced check, the maximum ACA can attempt to collect is the face value of the check plus $30 and interest at the statutory annual rate of 10% (which is what it has been for the past 9 years).

[Amerikaner83]

And chances are you'll find a nice provision of consumer protection under State law that you can sue them for....

As it is - attempting to collect more than legally allowed is an FDCPA violation

[merkurfan]

Amerikaner would know all about suing um to

I'm happy with things the way they are. ACA won't contact me again as they can't possiably validate. I have the check (they ran it though a machine and handed it back. I didn't even have to fill it out). So, it's a dead issue. I never write checks any more. Even my land lord gets a funds transfer as we bank at the same bank.

[Amerikaner83]

Amerikaner would know all about suing um to

I'm happy with things the way they are. ACA won't contact me again as they can't possiably validate. I have the check (they ran it though a machine and handed it back. I didn't even have to fill it out). So, it's a dead issue. I never write checks any more. Even my land lord gets a funds transfer as we bank at the same bank.

Yeah somethin like that.....I had pizza for dinner and thought of ya Merk!

Nice deal with the landlord thing - I like that. I don't write checks myself anymore - I do everything online...DF writes the rent check...she still does the check thing, I'm slowly trying to convince her otherwise.

[merkurfan]

I still have the same box of checks from when I opened my last account...

8 years ago. Still have over half of them left.

[prettykitty]

merk: I'm happy with things the way they are. ACA won't contact me again as they can't possibly validate. I have the check (they ran it though a machine and handed it back. I didn't even have to fill it out). So, it's a dead issue. I never write checks any more. Even my land lord gets a funds transfer as we bank at the same bank.

when they run the check through EFT machine doesn't it make a copy of the check? have they tried to validate? i have a check collection from an EFT transaction (i have the physical check) it's out of SOL 6/08, i'm just waiting to dispute. how do they validate EFT transactions?

btw yesterday i had asset accept collection for certegy deleted from EQ

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/online/payments.shtm

[merkurfan]

merk: I'm happy with things the way they are. ACA won't contact me again as they can't possibly validate. I have the check (they ran it though a machine and handed it back. I didn't even have to fill it out). So, it's a dead issue. I never write checks any more. Even my land lord gets a funds transfer as we bank at the same bank.

when they run the check through EFT machine doesn't it make a copy of the check? have they tried to validate? i have a check collection from an EFT transaction (i have the physical check) it's out of SOL 6/08, i'm just waiting to dispute. how do they validate EFT transactions?

btw yesterday i had asset accept collection for certegy deleted from EQ

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/online/payments.shtm

I never heard back from them after my DV.. So my guess is that they can't validate. it's been months since my timely DV.