brokeinok Posted August 27, 2007 Report Share Posted August 27, 2007 Reading alot of conflicting information about these, could someone please explain the reason behind them, have you used them, were they successful? Just kinda confused... I have several dv's out that are past the thirty days but wasn't sure if this should be my next move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brokeinok Posted August 27, 2007 Author Report Share Posted August 27, 2007 bump Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flycouture Posted August 28, 2007 Report Share Posted August 28, 2007 Follow the flow chart timeline http://www.creditinfocenter.com/rebuild/debt_validation_workflow.shtmldon't be afraid to go up against these companies the worst they can do is attempt to make you pay.. they're already doing that. You may have recorse against them , go to the debt tab and scroll down to suing th ca's. Check and see if cra's and ca's have violted anything and tke them to couirt! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brokeinok Posted August 28, 2007 Author Report Share Posted August 28, 2007 Thanks, got my chart at the front of my records and I've already dv'd them again but still curious about the estoppel thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lyssarene Posted August 28, 2007 Report Share Posted August 28, 2007 How are you trying to apply this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brokeinok Posted August 28, 2007 Author Report Share Posted August 28, 2007 I'm not trying to apply it yet. Right now I just want some clarification on what they are, what they are used for, do they work? The site has alot of conflicting information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Methuss Posted August 28, 2007 Report Share Posted August 28, 2007 Estoppel is a legal principle that says if you ask someone for something and they have a legal, moral, or contractual obligation to provide it to you, that they cannot bring the same thing you asked for as evidence against you in court if they ignored your request before court. Generally you have to ask and be ignored multiple times to use this.So to put it in an example, if you ask a CA for chain of title documentation and they ignore your repeated requests, you can claim estoppel by silence if they try to introduce chain of title documents in court. They had a legal and moral responsibility to provide them when you asked, but failed to do so so they should not be allowed to gain from that deception.An Estoppel letter is basically just a last effort to get the party to produce the documents and warns them that if they do not produce it, you will claim estoppel and ask they be barred from using it in court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brokeinok Posted August 28, 2007 Author Report Share Posted August 28, 2007 Wonderful! Thank you! That's what I was inferring from the information but wasn't sure. So one should dv multiple times before making use of this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Methuss Posted August 28, 2007 Report Share Posted August 28, 2007 So one should dv multiple times before making use of this?Estoppel does not eliminate the entire claim. And the FTC says a collector can choose to not respond to DV if they permanently cease all collection activity (which includes credit reporting).No this is more focused on document production. Sometimes a law requires the collector to produce documents on demand, othertimes there may not be such a requirement. What a collector must produce in a DV can vary based on the type of debt, whether it is assigned or bought, or what local laws may be in effect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brokeinok Posted August 28, 2007 Author Report Share Posted August 28, 2007 I'm SO glad that you said that! I've been so confused as to what to do about a couple of my accounts, the CA won't answer the DV requests but they are leaving me alone and are not reporting to the CRA's but the OC still is.... guess I just dispute those and move on? None of the balances are right anyway and only one of them is actually mine, the rest belong to a woman with my same name and birthdate, she's just 15 years older. I'm trying to negotiate a PFD for the one that is mine but I've read that this particular CC company isn't known for settling or compromising in any way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brokeinok Posted December 11, 2007 Author Report Share Posted December 11, 2007 Estoppel does not eliminate the entire claim. And the FTC says a collector can choose to not respond to DV if they permanently cease all collection activity (which includes credit reporting).No this is more focused on document production. Sometimes a law requires the collector to produce documents on demand, othertimes there may not be such a requirement. What a collector must produce in a DV can vary based on the type of debt, whether it is assigned or bought, or what local laws may be in effect.I'm preparing an answer to a summons and I need to clarify with you on this. Here is my situation:I got a letter from a collection lawyer hired by the OC, didn't know about this site, didn't understand the DV process and didn't do anything. Ten days after this initial letter a lawyer calls at work, I ask who he is and that he send me documentation of the debt and his authority in the matter. I also asked that he not call me at work anymore. Within the 30 days DV time of the initial letter, I get another one from the lawyer. Quit ignoring us and pay now. By this time I've started reading the CIC posts so I make up a short letter asking for the same things I did in the phone call and faxed it to them. During the next two weeks (still within the 30 days of the dunning letter), I get five more calls at work and thirty calls on my cell phone (have a log and copies of the phone bills as proof). The first call to work I answered and again requested this information and again faxed a request.Finally, after another month and a half, they stop calling but still no DV. Then four months later, I get another letter "we've tried to work with you, call us now or else." By this time I'm understanding my rights much better from reading CIC and I send another DV letter, outlining my previous contacts with them and asking AGAIN for the information. Finally, five and a half months after my initial verbal request and five months after the first written request, they send me old statements.Can I use the Estoppel Defense in my answer or does their finally providing the statements (albeit VERY late) void any Estoppel claim I might have? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recovering Attorney Posted December 11, 2007 Report Share Posted December 11, 2007 No. Estoppel is an equitable defense. Sounds great, but not applicable imo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brokeinok Posted December 11, 2007 Author Report Share Posted December 11, 2007 I took it out of the defenses, once I began thinking about it, I figured the court would rule on that in their favor since they did eventually get around to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nascar Posted December 11, 2007 Report Share Posted December 11, 2007 No. Estoppel is an equitable defense. Sounds great, but not applicable imoI'm partial to the "collector is mean and nasty" defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brokeinok Posted December 11, 2007 Author Report Share Posted December 11, 2007 lol... i have that one in there!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts