Mimi-to-8

Is this a violation or not?

Recommended Posts

Ok, I'm gathering ammo to use against CA when/if the time comes.

NCO has called my cell and left 2 messages (I have them saved).

1 before I received dunning letter and 1 after I received it.

(I just sent DV w/arb election also revoking calling my cell CMRRR but it hasn't gotten there yet).

1st message: almost inaudible, strong foreign accent, almost sounds like a message on top of another message in the background (weird!). They said "this message is for Juan"... (I am a female and I don't even know anyone named Juan and "Juan" sounds NOTHING like my name).

2nd message: they never said who the call was for, only stated their internal account ID and to call them regarding it.

Do I have anything here for any violation?

Link to post
Share on other sites

In every call, they should state that the call is from a debt collector, or is an attempt to collect a debt. Within 5 days of the 1st contact, they should have followed Section 809 of the FDCPA.

809. Validation of debts

(a) Within five days after the initial communication with a consumer in connection with the collection of any debt, a debt collector shall, unless the following information is contained in the initial communication or the consumer has paid the debt, send the consumer a written notice containing—

(1) the amount of the debt;

(2) the name of the creditor to whom the debt is owed;

(3) a statement that unless the consumer, within thirty days after receipt of the notice, disputes the validity of the debt, or any portion thereof, the debt will be assumed to be valid by the debt collector;

(4) a statement that if the consumer notifies the debt collector in writing within the thirty-day period that the debt, or any portion thereof, is disputed, the debt collector will obtain verification of the debt or a copy of a judgment against the consumer and a copy of such verification or judgment will be mailed to the consumer by the debt collector; and

(5) a statement that, upon the consumer’s written request within the thirty-day period, the debt collector will provide the consumer with the name and address of the original creditor, if different from the current creditor.

(B) If the consumer notifies the debt collector in writing within the thirty-day period described in subsection (a) that the debt, or any portion thereof, is disputed, or that the consumer requests the name and address of the original creditor, the debt collector shall cease collection of the debt, or any disputed portion thereof, until the debt collector obtains verification of the debt or any copy of a judgment, or the name and address of the original creditor, and a copy of such verification or judgment, or name and address of the original creditor, is mailed to the consumer by the debt collector. Collection activities and communications that do not otherwise violate this title may continue during the 30-day period referred to in subsection (a) unless the consumer has notified the debt collector in writing that the debt, or any portion of the debt, is disputed or that the consumer requests the name and address of the original creditor. Any collection activities and communication during the 30-day period may not overshadow or be inconsistent with the disclosure of the consumer’s right to dispute the debt or request the name and address of the original creditor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you. I am aware of the FDCPA guidelines and the obvious violations.

I guess what I'm asking is can I make any violation to use against them out of these messages?

The date on their dunning letter is dated before the 1st message.

I am just looking for possibilities like "harassment" with the "Juan" message and the fact they did not even name who the second message was for.

Do I have any possibilities here as ammo?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.