2nd dunning letter - 2nd CA - no validation

[sotiredofit]

Quick background:

Several months ago I received a dunning letter from "ABC" collection agency attempting to collect on an alleged debt owed to "123" (junk buyer?)

I sent them a timely DV letter, have the return receipt. I've heard nothing from "ABC".

Recently I received another dunning letter, this time from "XYZ" collection agency representing the same "123" company.

Most certainly I will DV the 2nd collection agency. My question is this:

Should I also DV "123"? (No address or other information given for this company on the letters - just the name)

[Feel violated]

To sotiredofit,

If nothing else, its why you dispute with the CRA's also. But it sounds like to me, 123 owns the debt and can't really validate it. First they used a dummy or legitimate entity called ABC to collect, as soon as you disputed, 123 yanked the paper back getting ABC off the hook, and now tries the same stunt with XYZ. And if that does not work, they may pawn it off to some

other ZYX entity. Making you waste time effort and money each time you send that cmrrr DV.

And if I were in your boat, I would (1) Try to establish if ABC&XYZ are actually independent companies or are actually owned by 123. (2) I would be checking my CRA's to see if 123, ABC, or XYZ are listed. And ABC should be listed as in dispute or gone now since they are out of the picture. (3) I would be using the CRA's to get an address to write 123 if you can't find it on your own. ( 4 ) And yes, I would be demanding debt validation out of 123. But I might wait to see if XYZ validates first. (5) But if it ever got to the point where 123 tried that third times a charm trick with a hypothetical ZYX and still listed 123 as the owner, I would be reading the riot act to the CRA's and to 123. Especially if I could show 123, ABC, XYZ, and ZYX were in fact the same entity. And would consider pressing criminal charges of fraud.

In my little dispute with asset, it never got that far, but where I come from, you gather the facts which takes personal research, try to punch giant holes in their story, and make their wheels fall off.

Accepting being hassled by stupid little games is for the accepting. I believe in fighting back aggressively

but politely. Sort of a velvet glove and an iron fist. Give them the rope to hang themselves, and when you have hard facts and they just still have nothing, then is the time to strike back.

As I said, I think they are trying to pull a shell game, now its your job to prove it. The history of correspondence gets you half way there, now find out who owns ABC and XYZ. And who the OC is, your State SOL on it, and as many relevant facts as you can find.

[sotiredofit]

To sotiredofit,

If nothing else, its why you dispute with the CRA's also. But it sounds like to me, 123 owns the debt and can't really validate it. First they used a dummy or legitimate entity called ABC to collect, as soon as you disputed, 123 yanked the paper back getting ABC off the hook, and now tries the same stunt with XYZ. And if that does not work, they may pawn it off to some

other ZYX entity. Making you waste time effort and money each time you send that cmrrr DV.

And if I were in your boat, I would (1) Try to establish if ABC&XYZ are actually independent companies or are actually owned by 123. (2) I would be checking my CRA's to see if 123, ABC, or XYZ are listed. And ABC should be listed as in dispute or gone now since they are out of the picture. (3) I would be using the CRA's to get an address to write 123 if you can't find it on your own. ( 4 ) And yes, I would be demanding debt validation out of 123. But I might wait to see if XYZ validates first. (5) But if it ever got to the point where 123 tried that third times a charm trick with a hypothetical ZYX and still listed 123 as the owner, I would be reading the riot act to the CRA's and to 123. Especially if I could show 123, ABC, XYZ, and ZYX were in fact the same entity. And would consider pressing criminal charges of fraud.

In my little dispute with asset, it never got that far, but where I come from, you gather the facts, punch giant holes in their story, and make their wheels fall off.

Thank you so much for the thorough reply.

I will be doing some digging/research to see if ABC and XYZ are affiliated with 123. I'm also sending off another DV letter to XYZ today.

Probably I should pull a credit report to see if any of these upstanding agencies has been filing anything.

Again, I appreciate your time.

[NASCAR_Devil]

Thank you so much for the thorough reply.

I will be doing some digging/research to see if ABC and XYZ are affiliated with 123. I'm also sending off another DV letter to XYZ today.

Probably I should pull a credit report to see if any of these upstanding agencies has been filing anything.

Again, I appreciate your time.

www.budhibbs.com might help

[sotiredofit]

Nascar Devil,

Bud Hibbs site helped a little. Thanks.

I sent off the DV to the 2nd collection agency once again requesting validation and also letting them know that they are attempting to collect a debt that was already timely disputed from a previous CA.

What do I get in the mail today? A letter from 2nd CA acknowledging "my request", stating they will request what I asked for from the JDB and mail me anything that they receive.

Now I'm curious to find out if this gets passed on to a third CA. (I still have no clue as to what it is for)

[NASCAR_Devil]

Nascar Devil,

Bud Hibbs site helped a little. Thanks.

I sent off the DV to the 2nd collection agency once again requesting validation and also letting them know that they are attempting to collect a debt that was already timely disputed from a previous CA.

What do I get in the mail today? A letter from 2nd CA acknowledging "my request", stating they will request what I asked for from the JDB and mail me anything that they receive.

Now I'm curious to find out if this gets passed on to a third CA. (I still have no clue as to what it is for)

Bud's site is great for digging into the character and tactics of the shadier CA's and JDB's. I don't buy into his philosphy of always sending a cease comm letter. I followed his advice a few years ago and it bit me in the a$$. If the JDB that owns the account is just passing it around to different CA's then I beleive they are violating since you've requested validation and they have yet to provide it. Did you also send a copy of the DV the JDB? If they pass it on to yet another CA to collect for them it will just rack up another violation. At that point I would go ahead and start with the FTC, AG, BBB and ACA complaints.

[Focus2069]

so, who gets the violation? the CA that sold it, or the CA that bought it? or both?

alot of times they just "sell" it to a subsidiry of the parent company anyway...like NCO has about 25 different CA's under them.

[nuttybuddee]

here's another poser for ya:

Been served summons by attorney

Sent dv letter to attorney (feb 19th)

heard nothing from attorney

sent second dv letter

filed a counter claim

attorney sent letter acknowledging receipt of debt validation letter and requesting 90 days (45 had already passed)

here's the question.......is there a time limit that ca have to respond to a dv letter? If they're an attorney (they are now classified under ca), do they have the same time limit? Can you cite the FDCPA or fdca that this falls under? I'm submitting my ammended counterclaim on Monday and would really like to include another violation to off set possible judgement.

[Focus2069]

there is no timelimit for a DV, they are supposed to stop all collection actions during that timeframe though.

If he has already been served, then you can file your own motions for dismissel or discovery (or something, im not a legal expert, just repeating what I have read here) I dont think a judge would go for the whole 90 day thing.........just my opinion though. One would think that if they filed suit already, they should have all that info....unless they were hoping for the consumer to not show up and get an easy default judgement...which is probably what happened.

[sotiredofit]

Nascar Devil:

I haven't DV'd the JDB yet because I do not have a clear address for them. However I did find out that they are 99% owned by another company and am considering sending the DV letter to them at the address listed for that company. IE: "123 Company, C/O 456 Company"

I still have a few days left to do that, and if I can't find a business address for the JDB that is what I will do unless someone else has another suggestion.