nervousinohio Posted November 21, 2007 Report Share Posted November 21, 2007 LVNV Funding alleges I have an account with them which they have never been able to validate so far. Back in January of 2007, I get some dunning letter from Law offices of Weltman, Weinberg & Reis & Company stating they are now collecting for their client LVNV funding blah blah blah.On 1/24/07, I sent a DV to Weltman and stooges certified mail which they received and signed for. I have never heard from them again UNTIL last week. Last week I receive a very generic letter from Weltman group regarding same account saying our client LVNV has authorized us to accept 60% of this balance as settlement for this claim.Is this considered continued collection activity? Anything I can do here?I know they will not have any validation because LVNV never had it!thanks for any responses/advise! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pbpb Posted November 22, 2007 Report Share Posted November 22, 2007 I'd say that qualifies as continued collections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmuse00 Posted November 22, 2007 Report Share Posted November 22, 2007 Weltman, Wienman are debt collecting attorneys. You need to DV them as well. I've dealt with them before. I dv'd and they could not validate, actually I had to dv them twice but stood my ground and I never heard from them again. I believe they were collecting an old charged off providan debt from DH annnnd they had called his mom out of state! Yeah I would definitely dv! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
debtorshusband Posted November 26, 2007 Report Share Posted November 26, 2007 Just posted this to a similar thread. Here's what I sent in a similar situation, with the comment that (although this is continued collection activity) one time could brushed off as an "honest mistake".Dear Sir:I am in receipt of your communication dated September xx, 20xx, regarding an alleged debt owed by my wife, (name redacted). A copy of your letter is enclosed.On August xx, 20xx, I sent your company a letter to the attention of (collection agent's name). This letter was sent certified with return receipt. The letter was delivered August xx, 20xx. If necessary, I can provide a copy of this letter and proof of delivery.In this letter, I informed you that my wife was exercising her rights under the FDCPA and was requiring complete verification of the debt. No such verification has yet been provided. The FDCPA further requires you to cease collection of the debt until you have obtained verification of the debt and mailed it to us.As a result, your letter of September xx, 20xx, which is a further attempt to collect a debt, is a violation of the FDCPA (15 USC1692g(). I urge you to comply with the law in this matter. I also urge you to comply with the requests made in my previous letter, including providing the requested documentation.Sincerely, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskinfan Posted November 26, 2007 Report Share Posted November 26, 2007 To piggyback this could a similar letter be used when the DV'd JDB sells account to another JDB and you get a new dunning letter? What I am asking is this, isn't the old JDB supposed to let the new JDB that the debt they just purchased is in dispute so couldn't you send a DV letter to new JDV with a statement advisng them of that and wouldn't that be a violation to attempt collection on a disputed debt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmuse00 Posted November 27, 2007 Report Share Posted November 27, 2007 I believe there was something in regards to "misrepresentation of a debt" However, debts can and have been resold. The best thing to do would be to DV the new CA. Perhaps others will chime in on this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
debtorshusband Posted November 27, 2007 Report Share Posted November 27, 2007 To piggyback this could a similar letter be used when the DV'd JDB sells account to another JDB and you get a new dunning letter? What I am asking is this, isn't the old JDB supposed to let the new JDB that the debt they just purchased is in dispute so couldn't you send a DV letter to new JDV with a statement advisng them of that and wouldn't that be a violation to attempt collection on a disputed debt?I believe it's widely accepted that a JDB can sell the account to another JDB, or that an Original Creditor can assign the account to a new Collection Agency, rather than sending validation information, and that you can then get a fresh "initial communication" dunning letter. It certainly happens often. What I do is send the exact same DV letter to the new CA with the added line:"These same requests were made of your client’s previous representative, but these requests have apparently been ignored."In the case of a JDB, the equivalent statement would be:"These same requests were made of the previous holder of the account, but these requests have apparently been ignored."I figure that tips off the new CA that the previous CA just passed rather than provide documentation, and that might make the new CA move on more quickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merkurfan Posted November 28, 2007 Report Share Posted November 28, 2007 Once a debt is disputed, that information is suppose to stay with the debt should it be sold or assigned to a new company. The buyer, if notified is in deep trouble if you disputed the debt and it was not validated. The seller is in trouble if they did not notify the buyer of the disputed status.At least that is how I remember reading it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts