phyregold Posted July 30, 2007 Report Share Posted July 30, 2007 I sent a DV letter to the CA.They recieved it on july 27th. I am confused about the 1-2 punch. Isnt it really "scheme" to catch them in a violation? That illeagle?But in case why wouldnt I overnight a letter to the CRA the very next day after they recieve it?Also do I really have to send a certified letter to the CRA? And whats the real advantage to that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razr Posted July 30, 2007 Report Share Posted July 30, 2007 I am confused about the 1-2 punch. Isnt it really "scheme" to catch them in a violation?There is nothing underhanded about it. Your are simply exercising your rights under the law. That illeagle?No, in fact it expressly follows the law.But in case why wouldnt I overnight a letter to the CRA the very next day after they recieve it?You could if you wanted.Also do I really have to send a certified letter to the CRA? And whats the real advantage to that?No you don't have to, but it is legal proof that you sent the letter. If you want/need the proof, cmrrr.-r Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmuse00 Posted July 30, 2007 Report Share Posted July 30, 2007 Nothing illegal about crossing your T's and dotting your I's. It's the CA's that love to be 'illegal". You dispute with the CA's, which is your right and you dispute with the CRA's, which again is a consumer's right to do. Disputing the validity of how a debt is being collected or reported is not illegal. Many of the CA's do not follow the proper guidelines and love to intimidate by using "illegal" tactics to benefit from uncollectible debts or debts caused by ID theft. We are simply making sure that they follow the guidelines put in place so that the consumers are not taken advantage of. I disputed a cable bill that was not mine, I did not even have cable! The CA kept insisting it was mine, verified with the CRA's that it was mine. Right before I intended on taking them to small claims court, they did their homework and turned out they were reporting it on my report in error! That was after 2 DV's I had sent to them. If I had not challenged the validity of that debt I would have paid a $625 debt. That my friend would have been illegal as I would have considered that robbery! Certified letter to the CRA's are a way of having a paper trail incase you have to prove anything in court. Shows CRA's received your dispute and if they did not do what they had to do to ensure the information they are reporting is accurate they violate the FCRA (Fair Credit Reporting Act). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razr Posted July 30, 2007 Report Share Posted July 30, 2007 Dang rmuse, your picture makes me feel like a teenager all over again. Hot chick looking at me, I can't take the pressure!-r Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmuse00 Posted July 30, 2007 Report Share Posted July 30, 2007 ........Let's keep on topic please! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razr Posted July 30, 2007 Report Share Posted July 30, 2007 ........Let's keep on topic please! Okay, but if I start stammering, It's your fault.-r Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justincase Posted July 31, 2007 Report Share Posted July 31, 2007 I sent a DV letter to the CA.They recieved it on july 27th. I am confused about the 1-2 punch. Isnt it really "scheme" to catch them in a violation? That illeagle?But in case why wouldnt I overnight a letter to the CRA the very next day after they recieve it?Also do I really have to send a certified letter to the CRA? And whats the real advantage to that?Below is some 1-2 punch info Divemedic posted for me to help me understand very simple. Remember your DV request must be timely or they don't have to respond.Sort of. The law states that they must cease all collection activity. If they reported the TL to the CRA before receiving the DV, and do nothing, they are not breaking the law. The 1-2 punch forces them to put up or shut up- you DV them, then you dispute with the CRA. They have 2 choices:1 verify the TL, which is a violation2 allow the TL to delete.Either way, you win.__________________Μολὼν ΛαβέIgitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrg Posted July 31, 2007 Report Share Posted July 31, 2007 I think rmuse's title says it all couldnt resisit. On topic? which topic?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts