Michigan debt validation - loophole?

[jetel01]

Hi,

I recently learned that Michigan has a unique clause in their debt validation legislature which states:

"Verification of the debt or any disputed portion of the debt shall include the number and amount of previously made payments and the name and address of the original creditor, if different from the current creditor, or a copy of the judgment against the debtor." (http://www.legislature.mi.gov/%28S%28mx0e2a20pupy1q45iyr3w145%29%29/mileg.aspx?page=getobject&objectname=mcl-339-918&highlight=)

I may be wrong, but it seems like most collection agencies would have a VERY hard time providing this information, correct?

Am I correct to assume that most people in Michigan who use this clause in their debt validation letters can escape the collection from collection agencies?

Do you think this clause/requirement lessens the chances of being sued by the original creditor at all?

Very curious to hear your thoughts...

Thanks so much!

[FL4answer58]

"(3) The failure of a consumer to dispute the validity of a debt under this section shall not be construed as an admission of liability by the consumer."

I don't think OCs would have a hard time providing this information. Most keep records for up to six years or more.

JDBs would have hard time providing this information.

(a) They would have to prove the amount of the debt owed. All records and use and payments.

( They would have to prove the date the communication was sent to the debtor. CMRR

© They would have to prove chain of assignment, names of the creditor(s) to whom the debt is owed.

(d) A statement specifying that unless the consumer, within 30 days after receipt of this notice, disputes the validity of the debt, or a portion of the debt, the debt will be assumed to be valid.

(e) A statement specifying that, if the consumer notifies the collection agency in writing within 30 days after receipt of this notice, that the debt, or any portion of the debt, is disputed, the collection agency shall obtain verification of the debt or a copy of a judgment against the consumer and that a copy of the verification or judgment shall be mailed to the consumer by the collection agency.

"Am I correct to assume that most people in Michigan who use this clause in their debt validation letters can escape the collection from collection agencies?"

I dont think people in Michigan who use this clause in their debt validation letters can escape the collection - but you may have Recourse if they sue you on 'condition precedent'.

Failure to validate according Michigan rules.

Edited October 3, 2010 by FL4answer58

[jetel01]

Thanks so much for your response, FL4answer58!

So, just to confirm that I am understanding correctly...

If I included that clause in a debt validation letter, and a JDB continued their collection efforts despite not being able to prove the payments like the law states they have to, I couldn't use that fact to prevent them from (legally) trying to collect or sue me?

Don't they have to validate properly to resume collection? Or is it different because this is a state law versus a federal one?

Thanks so much again for your help!!!