Jump to content

I got sued inside of 30 days of first contact from CA


kylecov04
 Share

Recommended Posts

I found this site while researching and preparing for Small Claims suit. Collection agency sent first statements out dated 1-26-09 and I explained that there were errors I needed to work out with the OC. I offered payment of two of the 5 medical billings, refused. I offered payment of $80.00 per week (full debt totals less than 1400.00) - REFUSED by legal department. Debt "in legal" upon first telephone call from CA. I requested validation by certified mail from CA for disputed charges within my 30 days. Instead of obtaining validation of possible errors the CA resent their own statements to me. One day later, 2-24-09, they filed suit with court. Nice! Anyone know of any statutes or cases parallel to this? LV

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found this site while researching and preparing for Small Claims suit. Collection agency sent first statements out dated 1-26-09 and I explained that there were errors I needed to work out with the OC. I offered payment of two of the 5 medical billings, refused. I offered payment of $80.00 per week (full debt totals less than 1400.00) - REFUSED by legal department. Debt "in legal" upon first telephone call from CA. I requested validation by certified mail from CA for disputed charges within my 30 days. Instead of obtaining validation of possible errors the CA resent their own statements to me. One day later, 2-24-09, they filed suit with court. Nice! Anyone know of any statutes or cases parallel to this? LV

Collection agencies if they do not validate your debt yet continue to pursue collection activity (file for judgments, call or write you) Consumer protection afforded by the FDCPA FDCPA

Section 809 (B),

FTC opinion letter Cass from LeFevre

$1,000

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Collection agencies if they do not validate your debt yet continue to pursue collection activity (file for judgments, call or write you) Consumer protection afforded by the FDCPA FDCPA

Section 809 (B),

FTC opinion letter Cass from LeFevre

$1,000

Nothing prevents a creditor from suing whether the CA validated or not. The OP may be able to counter sue but it will be up to the OP to prove the CA violated and that the OP should receive the full $1,000 (keep in mind, the judge could agree that there was a violation and award nothing in terms of $).

Also, while some will try, it is not the CA's responsibility to act as an mediator between a consumer and a creditor to help them settle billing errors. The CA's obligation is to request the amount of payment the creditor says is owed - billing errors are a separate issue between the creditor and the consumer.

The OP muddied the waters in terms of proving a violation by offering settlements in the middle of all this...that was not a good idea plus, the "statements" sent by the CA may well have met the minimum requirements for validation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, while some will try, it is not the CA's responsibility to act as an mediator between a consumer and a creditor to help them settle billing errors. The CA's obligation is to request the amount of payment the creditor says is owed - billing errors are a separate issue between the creditor and the consumer.

I understand that it is not their place to be a mediator. But if CA wants me to pay an amount I'd like them to attain the correct amount to pay. Not pay them and then hope that OC or the insurance company can refund to me any amount that I have overpaid.

The OP muddied the waters in terms of proving a violation by offering settlements in the middle of all this...that was not a good idea plus, the "statements" sent by the CA may well have met the minimum requirements for validation.

What do you mean by muddied the waters? What settlements in the middle?

Maybe it was validation, their own statements reprinted and additional interest calculated. Doesn't seem like validation when I've sat down with OC and proven that there were errors on my billing. Seems like CA would have to contact OC and validate that errors were or were not on billing they hold to collect.

Thank you for your response. It is helping my further understanding of collections a great deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing prevents a creditor from suing whether the CA validated or not. The OP may be able to counter sue but it will be up to the OP to prove the CA violated and that the OP should receive the full $1,000 (keep in mind, the judge could agree that there was a violation and award nothing in terms of $).

Also, while some will try, it is not the CA's responsibility to act as an mediator between a consumer and a creditor to help them settle billing errors. The CA's obligation is to request the amount of payment the creditor says is owed - billing errors are a separate issue between the creditor and the consumer.

The OP muddied the waters in terms of proving a violation by offering settlements in the middle of all this...that was not a good idea plus, the "statements" sent by the CA may well have met the minimum requirements for validation.

There is new caselaw out there (can post the case later) that a CA can sue within 30 days, but they MUST be quite clear that them suing in no way invalidates a timely DV. The CA has to insure the consumer is aware that being sued within that 30 day window does not disqualify the consumer from exercising their right to verification. If they are not crystal clear about that point, then it fails the 'least sophisticated consumer" standard, thus violates the FDCPA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is new caselaw out there (can post the case later) that a CA can sue within 30 days, but they MUST be quite clear that them suing in no way invalidates a timely DV. The CA has to insure the consumer is aware that being sued within that 30 day window does not disqualify the consumer from exercising their right to verification. If they are not crystal clear about that point, then it fails the 'least sophisticated consumer" standard, thus violates the FDCPA.

I think they feel they might have provided validation by sending their own statements back the day before filing suit.

Do you happen to know how critical the "on or about date" is when a CA files suit? They typed in a date on court papers that is nearly two months prior to when they even received the account(s) for collections. That's another issue I am trying to research.

I look forward to seeing the case or if you could just provide a name I'll try to find it for myself. Thanks for your post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they feel they might have provided validation by sending their own statements back the day before filing suit.

Do you happen to know how critical the "on or about date" is when a CA files suit? They typed in a date on court papers that is nearly two months prior to when they even received the account(s) for collections. That's another issue I am trying to research.

** the date they Made the papers is not important , the Date they FILED is.

I have that same issue papers typed up 2/20 filed 3/05/ served 3/27..

I look forward to seeing the case or if you could just provide a name I'll try to find it for myself. Thanks for your post.

if they did send you" validation" before they filed, not much you can do but answer any summons and go from there with your defences

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if they did send you" validation" before they filed, not much you can do but answer any summons and go from there with your defences

Their validation is sales as sent before. Only this time interest is not stated separately aside the balance. This tile they just stated a combined amount.

There was something in the quoted section regarding dates. Did that come from you? The date question I had was this:

1-15-09 CA says they received account from OC

1-26-09 CA sent first statements to me regarding debt

2-24-09 Filled out papers and filed them at small claims court

On those papers they claim an "on or about" date of 11-5-08 (A date which happens to be the last payment I had made to the OC). Court papers files for a debt date that is nearly two months before they even received my account to collect on.

It's a little error, but yet one more error this CA is making.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is new caselaw out there (can post the case later) that a CA can sue within 30 days, but they MUST be quite clear that them suing in no way invalidates a timely DV. The CA has to insure the consumer is aware that being sued within that 30 day window does not disqualify the consumer from exercising their right to verification. If they are not crystal clear about that point, then it fails the 'least sophisticated consumer" standard, thus violates the FDCPA.

There is nothing new about it.

The creditor can sue at any time whether they ever used a CA or not.

However, if a CA is involved and received a timely request for validation and didn't validate but is, with the authority of the creditor, pressing ahead with a suit then they can likely be held to be in violation - getting a judge to care about it is another matter and it any case, it would up to the consumer to sue for the violation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry to offend you so much! You and another member from your great state. Yeah, judges won't give a S*** about the law, at all, they'll only care if you you owe... not how someone treats you in the process. And not if rights are violated. Why don't you present that to your state officials? There are a lot of tax dollar that could be saved by shutting down the judicial systems since they are not necessary. I don't know why on earth this credit forum even came into existence. Obviously, judges won't care!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Their validation is sales as sent before. Only this time interest is not stated separately aside the balance. This tile they just stated a combined amount.

There was something in the quoted section regarding dates. Did that come from you? The date question I had was this:

1-15-09 CA says they received account from OC

1-26-09 CA sent first statements to me regarding debt

2-24-09 Filled out papers and filed them at small claims court

On those papers they claim an "on or about" date of 11-5-08 (A date which happens to be the last payment I had made to the OC). Court papers files for a debt date that is nearly two months before they even received my account to collect on.

It's a little error, but yet one more error this CA is making.

I think the 11-5-08 date would be date you"defaulted to OC"" this is the basis of the claim on or about that date you stopped paying OC" then 1-15 CA gets account from OC,1-26 CA sents you dunning notice,(This is when you would have sent DV to CA) more or less 30 days later CA filed small claims.

this is where you need to focus,, CA needs to show the Correct amount you owe, if they can not , then they loose.( unjust enrichment).CA is suing you NOT the OC, your "defence" would simply being able to show( from your "found Mistakes with the oc) that the Amount is Not correct.so if CA shows 200 and you can show a Corrected amount of 50 ...

can you countersue. Maybe IF you can show you DV'd CA Before they filed a small claims.. Green card..well within the 30 days CA was suppossed to give you..you will have to pay a fee for counterclaims.

your answer should be something like this

Claim

X owes CA X money

Deny amount owed, amount is incorrect

afferm defences:

as to Counterclaims:

OC is due XXX, Ca violated FDCRA 809b, filed suit before Debt was validated.. CA failed to provided proof of whats being claimed ,

ect..what ever reason you feel CA is wrong in debt amount..

I know your very upset but you need to get one thing at a time done the CA is the most important right now,,

even IF the Oc is wrong you need to worry about beating the CA, deal with OC after..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's be clear here...a CA cannot sue anybody of their own volition...they have no standing to sue because they are NOT the injured party. If the CA is "suing" it is only with the express permission of and perhaps the direct instructions of the OC.

your correct, the ca is suing on behalf of the oc, but to make it simple for the OP i am using the CA,,,

op is having problems with the OC, yes but right now OP needs to worry about the CA and court

Link to comment
Share on other sites

your correct, the ca is suing on behalf of the oc, but to make it simple for the OP i am using the CA,,,

op is having problems with the OC, yes but right now OP needs to worry about the CA and court

Thanks for agreeing but you missed my point...perhaps I didn't make it clearly...the OP cannot be ignored in this as it is the OP's records that will be presented the CA can be nothing more than a middle man in all of this.

In addition, the OP has made it clear that he/she owes most of what has been billed (even having agreed to and then defaulted on a repayment plan if memory serves)...so prevailing in court sounds like an uphill battle to me since small claims are courts of equity...if the judge feels the bill is owed then the OP will almost certainly loose in court.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, I have to disagree with the fact that winning in court is impossible (if that's what you were implying).

I have had many people win in court against not only the CA but the OC. It's a matter of having a solid case and these guys generally do not. It's not easy, but definitely doable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, I have to disagree with the fact that winning in court is impossible (if that's what you were implying).

I have had many people win in court against not only the CA but the OC. It's a matter of having a solid case and these guys generally do not. It's not easy, but definitely doable.

Well, I wasn't saying impossible but I think if you had read all of this poster's threads (there are three or more on this subject) I think you would have a similar view to mine.

The OP is not disagreeing that he/she owes the medical providers money and in fact agreed to a repayment plan at one point and then defaulted on it...he/she is not claiming that not all the bill(s) is/are owed due to billing errors.

As you know, small claims courts (which is where this case is if I understand correctly) is not going to be anywhere near as concerned about the letter of the law as it will be with the basic question of whether some or all of the bills are owed by the OP. Since even he/she has apparently admitted as such (at the very least by virtue of the prior repayment plan) I don't see much luck in claiming now that a judgment in favor of the plaintiff shouldn't be granted.

A possible suite for FDCPA violations seems muddy at best and I don't think will be an "out" for the OP.

Of course, if the OC's lawyer shows up and is totally unprepared and the OP can get his/her S*** together and punch large holes in the OC's claims then it might be a different story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't read the other threads on this, so, my comments are based solely on what I read here.

If a health insurance was involved, the OP should contact them and ask for copies of all EOB's that apply. This way, the OP will know exactly what amounts they are liable for. The OP is only liable for the amounts shown as copay/cost share/patient responsibility on the EOB's. Some insurance carriers have special departments to assist in collections.

As to the "validation" sent to OP. If it is only the CA's own computer generated "list", it does not meet the burden. The proof must be on the letterhead of the OC that clearly shows the amount(s) charged, all deductions (discounts, agreements, etc.) from insurance, and ending with an amount that is the responsibility of the OP. Yes, interest is allowed if it is shown on the original bills, or included in the papers signed by the OP at time of treatment, and/or allowed by statute.

If the OP answers, as they most definitely should, use the discovery process to get the answers necessary to cause an amicable settlement. By using 809©, if it gets to court, the OP will have the opportunity to determine what is the true amount due. This is exactly what happened to cause Spears v. Brennan (a good read).

The only arguement I see is that the OP does not agree with the amounts claimed. The OP has all rights to have them broke down accordingly.

It is true that most small claim "judges" (wannabe's) pay no attention to violations, only if the debt is yours, but, again, if the OP does their homework and prepares properly, can change the decision. An example is that a person went to court, in Salem, Oregon, by coincidence, regarding a power bill which was disputed from the beginning, with the OC. They refused to adjust, assigned, CA did nothing, went to court. Told judge, he discounted, and all was done. Everyone happy. This happened in 1991.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for your post.

I did request EOB's from insurance company. No reply. I'll be on the phone with them again tomorrow.

Countersuit has been filed against CA based on FDCPA violations. Now to get ducks in a row.

As to the "validation" sent to OP. If it is only the CA's own computer generated "list", it does not meet the burden. The proof must be on the letterhead of the OC that clearly shows the amount(s) charged, all deductions (discounts, agreements, etc.) from insurance, and ending with an amount that is the responsibility of the OP. Yes, interest is allowed if it is shown on the original bills, or included in the papers signed by the OP at time of treatment, and/or allowed by statute.

Can I ask where this information came from? Interest is allowed by state law at a rate of 9% simple interest per annum. Only question is when can CA start charging the interest. From the date they get the account, or the date of treatment(s)?

Can I ask the name of the case from Salem, OR do I can give it a read?

Thanks again for your input.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Usually, when you ask for copies, the norm is about 10 days. The easiest way I found is to ask for a specific provider and/or date range, such as, local Hospital in the month of April. If this is an ER visit, most often a seperate billing is filed, thus, two bills for one visit. You may even have another one if the Doctor is contracted. I use the whole month just to be safe, even if there are visits to an ER, Doctor, Xray, whatever, as they may all be for one treatment.

Read FDCPA 809(B) as it is clear that the "proof" must be from the OC.

As to the interest, I've seen where the initial letter had the exact amount due the OC, then following letters after the 30 days, showed interest added. I think it starts from date of assgnment as I've never personally received monthly statements from providers showing interest added. If another member has, please share with us. Regarding your question as to where this info comes from, it all depends on what I said befre. If allowed, it is legit If not, yu ca't be charged.

As to the case you ask of, in all small claims, no transcripts are kept, unless, with court permission, you bring your own with you, at your expense. Check your PM's as I'm sending you one. Read my thread at top of page on medical collections.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been tied up with Veterans "stuff", among other things. For over 11 years I've been fighting the VA on one issue. I finally had sufficient proof to afford me benefit of the doubt. This new judge sent out from DC I saw in Janaury put a crimp in it by now wanting me to see another Doctor and have them state clearly "to what percentage" the probability would be. Mind you, I am already 100% Service Connected. This claim is only for them to recognize and pay me retro funds from when I had my heart attack in 1997. The whole of the problem is that I am only claiming "contributing", not a direct cause. But, the main problem is that PTSD is not in the ratings book, and, no one has placed PTSD with Mental Strees, though, it is known to be true by medical field.

Also, my daughter's mother passed away on the 8th. My wife and I went over to assist in the passing. Before anyone asks, this was her adoptive mother. Short version is high school, girlfriend, pregnant, I refused to marry due to her parents, child given up for adoption without my knowledge. When I found out 3 years later, i swore I would find her. Found her in April, 2002. I only expected a friendship, but, recognized and called "Dad" ever since. Her adoptive father passed in 1997.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Usually, when you ask for copies, the norm is about 10 days. The easiest way I found is to ask for a specific provider and/or date range, such as, local Hospital in the month of April. If this is an ER visit, most often a seperate billing is filed, thus, two bills for one visit. You may even have another one if the Doctor is contracted. I use the whole month just to be safe, even if there are visits to an ER, Doctor, Xray, whatever, as they may all be for one treatment.

Read FDCPA 809(B) as it is clear that the "proof" must be from the OC.

As to the interest, I've seen where the initial letter had the exact amount due the OC, then following letters after the 30 days, showed interest added. I think it starts from date of assgnment as I've never personally received monthly statements from providers showing interest added. If another member has, please share with us. Regarding your question as to where this info comes from, it all depends on what I said befre. If allowed, it is legit If not, yu ca't be charged.

As to the case you ask of, in all small claims, no transcripts are kept, unless, with court permission, you bring your own with you, at your expense. Check your PM's as I'm sending you one. Read my thread at top of page on medical collections.

Your information is very helpful, thank you. Just to clarify on the interest. Very first letter from CA held interest charges. The amounts don't add up to teh rate they later stated charging. Interest is allowed by state law. But I cannot anything stating the date of when it can be charged from. Be it the date of service/appointment with doctor or the first day the CA received the account to collect. I'd like to find it in writing rather that walking into a courtroom and basing this issue on assumption only. I've done the math on their statements and their amount done account out correctly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.