Jump to content

Debt verified...Wanting to have fun while I wait...


docniss
 Share

Recommended Posts

Ok so I have been contacted by a collection agency RMS, they verified the debt, but failed to prove they can do business in my state. I know they do not have a business registration in my state. I refuse to deal with them (they were also trying to collect on another account but when I DV'd them on that they disappeared.) Oh yeah, my DV included a cease telephone communication, all communication must be in writing. This morning they called and left a v.m. SOOO I am thinking about giving it a couple of days to let them rack up some more violations then suing them for FDCPA sec 805 © violation. I will lose any suit with the OC, I am certain of that, but thought I could stick it to the CA. I have never gone this route so any suggestions?

Unfortunately, I will have to deal with a judgment from the OC, my business is more than struggling due to the economy and structure of my business. I find it more important that I take the small amount of money earned and feed my family.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before you claim a violation, consider how many days has passed since their receipt of your letter. If within a few, forget it. If over at least 14 days, you have them. But, again, know their operation as they can sometimes find ways to get around it, one being having a plan in effect to avoid this. Remember, they can have a few days for your "Do not call" to be entered into their system. Don't misunderstand, use it as leverage to offset any amount you do owe, just don't expect to win big in court.

As to licensing, you bet. Use this against them. But, it is best to just tell them to close, delete, and go eat Maggot Droppings, or be sued. If your state holds the OC liable for the assignee's actions, use this in your letter also.

Lastly, you mentioned your business. If this debt is from your business, the FDCPA does not apply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMHO I have to disagree that there would be cause of action under 805 ©, look how it reads:

© CEASING COMMUNICATION. If a consumer notifies a debt collector in writing that the consumer refuses to pay a debt or that the consumer wishes the debt collector to cease further communication with the consumer, the debt collector shall not communicate further with the consumer with respect to such debt, except --

(1) to advise the consumer that the debt collector's further efforts are being terminated;

(2) to notify the consumer that the debt collector or creditor may invoke specified remedies which are ordinarily invoked by such debt collector or creditor; or

(3) where applicable, to notify the consumer that the debt collector or creditor intends to invoke a specified remedy.

By what you sent sent in your request for DV you also told them to comnicate in writing only, which is commonly know as a "limited C&D" and clearly 805© makes no mention of. By requesting DV you are requesting infomation from them, and you have not (at least what you posted) refused to pay. If by chance you have come accross some new case law or opinions (other than ours) please share with the board. Look elsewhere, you know there gonna blow it somewhere!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok so I have been contacted by a collection agency RMS, they verified the debt, but failed to prove they can do business in my state. I know they do not have a business registration in my state. I refuse to deal with them (they were also trying to collect on another account but when I DV'd them on that they disappeared.) Oh yeah, my DV included a cease telephone communication, all communication must be in writing. This morning they called and left a v.m. SOOO I am thinking about giving it a couple of days to let them rack up some more violations then suing them for FDCPA sec 805 © violation. I will lose any suit with the OC, I am certain of that, but thought I could stick it to the CA. I have never gone this route so any suggestions?

Unfortunately, I will have to deal with a judgment from the OC, my business is more than struggling due to the economy and structure of my business. I find it more important that I take the small amount of money earned and feed my family.

Don't give up on the fight with the OC, hit the legal forum here and fight tooth n nail, some OC keep lousy records while others are pristine but remember THERE IS ALWAYS A DEFENSE!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wahoo238, as to your position on 805, no matter how clear it is written, what you missed is that any business must be afforded a reasonable period of time to respond. That is why I said that if they called at time of receipt, they are safe. If reasonable time has passed, they are in violation. But, again, if they can show the court they have a program in effect to assist in this not happening, they usually slide. Many times they claim that it was "lost" in the process, or some other lame excuse, but, that is all that is necessary. Always remember that for all the statutes to protect us, they have more "allowable excuses" to protect them, due solely to the type of business they are in. Yes, it is not fair, but, who are we?

Does this mean you do not claim a violation, of course not. You would simply cite the time frame, the communications involved, etc. Once you have done this, you inform the CA by CMRR of the violations, state clearly that due to this, you will remit a fair amount, say $.25 on the dollar, as payment in full, and, as long as they close, delete, and go eat Maggot Droppings, you will not take further action. Otherwise you will name them as a defendant in a civil suit in a court of proper jurisdiction. Now, if they sue you, then, of course, you file a claim so as to be heard. Here, if you do, knowing the burden of proof is on the CA, it is up to you to show the court the seriousness of the violation, blah, blah, to offset the amount claimed. True, if the judge dismisses their claim with prejudice, outstanding. But, if they cut it in half, you still won.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wahoo238, as to your position on 805, no matter how clear it is written, what you missed is that any business must be afforded a reasonable period of time to respond. That is why I said that if they called at time of receipt, they are safe. If reasonable time has passed, they are in violation. But, again, if they can show the court they have a program in effect to assist in this not happening, they usually slide. Many times they claim that it was "lost" in the process, or some other lame excuse, but, that is all that is necessary. Always remember that for all the statutes to protect us, they have more "allowable excuses" to protect them, due solely to the type of business they are in. Yes, it is not fair, but, who are we?

Does this mean you do not claim a violation, of course not. You would simply cite the time frame, the communications involved, etc. Once you have done this, you inform the CA by CMRR of the violations, state clearly that due to this, you will remit a fair amount, say $.25 on the dollar, as payment in full, and, as long as they close, delete, and go eat Maggot Droppings, you will not take further action. Otherwise you will name them as a defendant in a civil suit in a court of proper jurisdiction. Now, if they sue you, then, of course, you file a claim so as to be heard. Here, if you do, knowing the burden of proof is on the CA, it is up to you to show the court the seriousness of the violation, blah, blah, to offset the amount claimed. True, if the judge dismisses their claim with prejudice, outstanding. But, if they cut it in half, you still won.

Respectfully I disagree that I missed anthing. While I would certainly agree that a buisness must be afforded reasonable time, I can only assume such time has passed. The OP stated he sent a DV (with a limited C&D) and has already recieved validation from the CA. So still I see no violation(s).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think validation is not complete yet. They are not registered to perform collection activities in the state, and conveniently ommitted that from validation.

That alone should make them go away, I would make that the driving point of a C&D letter - go away, or I will report you to the state collection board.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think validation is not complete yet. They are not registered to perform collection activities in the state, and conveniently ommitted that from validation.

That alone should make them go away, I would make that the driving point of a C&D letter - go away, or I will report you to the state collection board.

They didn't conveniently omit anything; the two issues have nothing to do with each other.

The FDCPA does not require a collector to "prove" they are licensed in a particular state; if they've sent what the FDCPA requires (and it sounds as if they have), they they've validated as much as is required. Likewise, once they have supplied the minimum required validation, they can then, per the FDCPA, continue their collection activities including attempting to contact by phone.

While not unimportant, whether or not they are properly licensed/bonded, etc. in the consumer's state is a totally different issue and generally, not anything the consumer can do anything about other than lodge a complaint with the appropriate state agency for them to deal with or not as they see fit.

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.