Does this satisfy the rules of validation?

[Hal Jordan]

Ok,

I have a collection for an old MRI I had back in 08/2006. The bill was about $1200. My insurance paid $650 and I paid $350 (which I thought took care of it).

Well, when I started repairing my credit this was one of the items that was on there. So I sent the Collection agency that has this (Kansas Counselours) a debt validation letter. I asked for their proof authority to collect this debt to prove that they are in fact able to take payment on behalf of the MRI company.

I asked for the item specificly bearing my signature such as a contract or a statement of which I agreed to pay for services.

and Lastley I asked for a complete account history as to how the amount of the alleged debt was arrived at, including original charges, payment history, any charges added for collection activity, date account was opened, date of last payment, and any addresses associated with this alleged debt.

They sent me a photo copy of piece of paper with my name, dob and ssn and it says this..

Hal Jordan

Lower extremetie MRI $1204

Blue Cross Blue shield (-$646)

patient (-$350)

Remainder $208

Bad Debt write off $208

______________

Total = $0

Then hand written on the paper it says "Please pay $208 immediately to pay off account"

-------------------------

Does this validate it? Do they have to provide proof of their legal ability to collect this debt? Do they have to provide me proof of the "agreement" to pay signed at the hospital?

It is almost out of the Statute of Limitations. It will be outside of SOL on 09/2011 (5 years in kansas).

What would be the best course of action here?

[BV80]

Does this validate it? Do they have to provide proof of their legal ability to collect this debt? Do they have to provide me proof of the "agreement" to pay signed at the hospital?

What they sent you is more than you would get from some CAs. Would it be proof in a court of law? No...not if they were a JDB and you challenged it.

What would be the best course of action here?

It depends upon what you wish to accomplish. Do you want to pay the debt or not? If not, let the SOL run out.

Are they the 1st CA to have the debt? Have they purchased it? Have they ever contacted you? If the medical facility still owns the debt, I'd contact them to see if they, in fact, contracted the CA to collect. If it's legitimate, it's back to what you want to accomplish.

[Hal Jordan]

No, I have never been contacted about this before. I do not believe it's ever been sold to any other CA.

I actually offered to PFD (while stating that I did not believe it was my debt). But they refused and said it was against their policy to delete these items. I even called and spoke to a supervisor and they told me the exact same thing. They of course tried to lie and tell me that paying it off would stop it from being a negative trade line on my credit reports.

Do I want to pay it. Only if they will delete it. There is no other way I'm going to pay it (which they're refusing)

I did some digging and found a follow up letter using HIPA violation

-------------

This letter is being sent to you in response to your attached letter.

On 03/ /2011 You received my letter requesting validation of this debt. You responded with a computerized printout of a medical accounting. This is not sufficient. FDCPA Section 809. Validation of debts [15 USC 1692g] requires that you provide proof that this debt is actually owed to you (COLLECTIONA AGENCY) and not to the original creditor and that you have legal authority and right to collect payment for this debt.

This is not a refusal to pay, but a notice that your claim is once again being disputed.

Under the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act (FDCPA), I have the right to request validation of the debt you say I owe you.

I am again requesting proof that I am indeed the party you are asking to pay this debt, and that there is in fact some contractual obligation which is binding on me to pay this debt. Specifically a document bearing my signature agreeing to pay this alleged debt

Please attach copies of:

1: Agreement with your client that grants you the authority to collect on this alleged debt, or proof of acquisition by purchase or assignment. and authorization under subtitle D of the ARRA ,SEC. 13401. APPLICATION OF SECURITY PROVISIONS AND PENALTIES TO BUSINESS ASSOCIATES OF COVERED ENTITIES;and SEC. 13407(1) BREACH OF SECURITY.—The term ‘‘breach of security’’ means, with respect to unsecured PHR identifiable health information of an individual in a personal health record, acquisition of such information without the authorization of the individual.

Please note that enforcement of penalties against you is covered under the penalty rules of the HITECH Act as issued 11/30/2009 and the penalty rules of the FCRA and FACTA including FACT Act changes final rules effective July 1, 2010.

2: An Agreement that bears the signature of the alleged debtor wherein he or she agreed to pay the creditor AND as this is a medical account a copy of any HIPAA authorization.

Please also be advised that this letter is not only a formal dispute, but a request that you cease and desist any and all collection activities, including reporting of; or verifying of this account on my credit reports.

I require compliance with the terms and conditions of this letter within 30 days. or a complete withdrawal, in writing, of any claim.

In the event of noncompliance, I reserve the right to file charges and/or complaints with the OCR on your HIPAA violations and appropriate County, State & Federal authorities ,the BBB and for violations of the FDCPA, FCRA, and Federal and State statutes on fraudulent extortion and illegal collection activities on any account that may be time-barred as well as Kansas medical privacy rules.

I also hereby reserve my right to take private civil action against you to recover damages.

Sincerely,

[Hal Jordan]

Am I spinning my wheels with that?

Ultimately what I want to accomplish is the removal of this item from my Credit Reports.

[BV80]

On 03/ /2011 You received my letter requesting validation of this debt. You responded with a computerized printout of a medical accounting. This is not sufficient. FDCPA Section 809. Validation of debts [15 USC 1692g] requires that you provide proof that this debt is actually owed to you (COLLECTIONA AGENCY) and not to the original creditor and that you have legal authority and right to collect payment for this debt.

The FDCPA does not specify that the CA has to prove they are authorized to collect for the OC. It merely states that they must show a debt is owed and to whom (who?).

You can send a letter, but there's no guarantee they'll respond. Here's an idea. If you're willing to wait until the debt is outside the SOL, once the SOL is up, dispute the debt with the CRAs. If it comes back verified, dispute with the CA. Demand they prove they have the right to report. If they don't want to prove they have the right to report, they may close their files, and turn the debt back over to the OC. If they are no longer collecting for the OC, because they turned it back over to the OC, they can't report.

Of course, there's the chance they will provide proof they are authorized to collect. Not much you can after that if they won't agree to a PFD

The reason I say to wait until the SOL is up is because you don't want to stir up a hornet's nest with the OC and create a higher risk of a lawsuit.

[Guest usctrojanalum]

The debt is validated. They can continue collection activities, everything you have asked for in your second letter - they are not required under any law to provide it.

[Hal Jordan]

Since this is a medical debt do I have any recourse using the HIPAA violation threat?

[Hal Jordan]

The debt is validated. They can continue collection activities, everything you have asked for in your second letter - they are not required under any law to provide it.

I see..

Since this has been validated, since they are refusing to PFD.

Should I try and contact the OC and see if they will take payment?

And if so, can having them pull this back from collections get it removed from my reports? Do I try and get a signed statement from the OC saying they are recalling the item from collections for payment?

[Hal Jordan]

Here's where I get a little confused. Because according to this site under the main page on the debt validation part is says.

http://www.creditinfocenter.com/rebuild/debt_validation.shtml

The Right to Validate Your Debt

Under the FDCPA, you are allowed to validate this debt, and the creditor (in this case, the collection agency) must show you proof that you owe the debt to the collection agency (not to the original creditor.)

The specific section of the FDCPA:

FDCPA Section 809. Validation of debts [15 USC 1692g]

( 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.

Plus, they must show proof positive that you owe them this debt. It's not enough to send you a computer-generated printout of the debt. There is an opinion letter from the FTC to back this up:

I got that letter from this site and I am following the flow detailed on this site.

??????

I'm not trying to disagree with you USCALUM. I know you're a sharp guy but I'm confused why this site says something different than what you're saying??

Can you help me understand? (Again, not trying to be argumentative)

[Dr. Evil]

because what this site says is what the powers that be wish the law said and ustro's response is what the law actually says.

Edited March 17, 2011 by Dr. Evil

[Guest usctrojanalum]

You kind of just proved my point for me, nowhere in section 809 does it say they must provide what you are asking for.

[workingpoor]

As much as we all want it to read differently, all they are required to send as validation is the name and address of the OC, the original account number, and the amount. That's it.

Token legislation....

[Hal Jordan]

No kidding.. About the Token legislation.

After I posted what I did earlier I did some digging and even tried looking HIPAA stuff and apparently there is no chance of getting it removed unless the OC has been paid.. but that's for another thread and not this one.

Thank you guys for your responses and for taking the time to answer my questions.

I will try and contact the original creditor and see if they will take payment in agreement for rescinding the collection and agreeing to have the CA remove any informatin they've posted to my account.

I have a very small collection for $36 for an old med bill that the OC sent to collections. I called them on the phone this afternoon and they said they would rescind the collection and write me a statement saying they were rescinding it and request that the CA delete their information. She was very nice.

I'm going by there after work tonight to try and pay them. Perhaps the other Medical provider will do the same.

Edited March 17, 2011 by Hal Jordan

[Drake Savory]

As much as we all want it to read differently, all they are required to send as validation is the name and address of the OC, the original account number, and the amount. That's it.

Token legislation....

So they don't have to prove they own/were assigned the debt if you didn't DV in the first 30 days?

[Amerikaner83]

So they don't have to prove they own/were assigned the debt if you didn't DV in the first 30 days?

Nope. They don't even have to respond you you at all if you don't DV within the first 30 days.

When and if it gets to a Courtroom, then they have to prove it (only if you bring it up and push the issue).

[Drake Savory]

Nope. They don't even have to respond you you at all if you don't DV within the first 30 days.

When and if it gets to a Courtroom, then they have to prove it (only if you bring it up and push the issue).

So let's say this is the (all too common) scenerio

Debtor misses 30 day DV time limit

Debtor asks for validation

JDB says, "No. You missed the 30 day window."

Debtor disputes line item

JDB validates line item

Now the JDB has violated the FDCPA if they cannot validate the debt/prove ownership. But you are stuck assuming they can't because logically (a JDB using logic?) they would have validated your DV even outside of the 30 day window just to avoid this issue.

Is that an accurate synopsis or am I missing something?

[Guest usctrojanalum]

No, JDB has not violated the FDCPA in your scenario. The dispute has to be timely. The validation requirements and Statute of Limitations (lol @ 1 year) are probably the least consumer friendly sections of the consumer protection statute.

[Hal Jordan]

Since we're discussing this let me ask this..

If I never received any notice from the CA that they have a debt they are collecting on. Example, I do not find out about it until I see it on my credit report. I then send them the DV letter after discovering it..

Does the 30 day rule apply to this scenario? Basically is the date of the 30 day rule from the date that I contacted them since they never sent me a letter letting me know.. Or is it just assumed that the CA sent notification when they got the debt?

Do I have to prove I never received notification within the initial time limit?

Do they have to prove they did send notification within the initial time limit?

Edited March 18, 2011 by Hal Jordan

[Guest usctrojanalum]

Do they have to prove they did send notification within the initial time limit?

Nope, this is why CA's do not send initial dunning letters CMRR. They just have to show they have "systems in place" to send out such letters.

[Drake Savory]

No, JDB has not violated the FDCPA in your scenario. The dispute has to be timely. The validation requirements and Statute of Limitations (lol @ 1 year) are probably the least consumer friendly sections of the consumer protection statute.

OK

So you go to court and they can't

1) prove it's a valid debt

and/or

2) prove they own/were assigned the debt

what happens? Do they have to remove the line items? Cease collection attempts? Pay $1000 for verifying the original dispute?

[Hal Jordan]

Nope, this is why CA's do not send initial dunning letters CMRR. They just have to show they have "systems in place" to send out such letters.

Wow.. so what's the point of even sending them a dispute letter? I assume this is why a couple of them have never responded to anything I've sent them other than to update each month to my credit reports that I didn't make a payment that month...

Edited March 18, 2011 by Hal Jordan

[Drake Savory]

Wow.. so what's the point of even sending them a dispute letter? I assume this is why a couple of them have never responded to anything I've sent them other to update it each month on my credit report..

I know. I have to send everything CMRRR and they don't? I have one they sent to an out of date address. Since they have a "system in place" it is presumptive that they sent it to the right place and/or I received it?

[BV80]

OK

So you go to court and they can't

1) prove it's a valid debt

and/or

2) prove they own/were assigned the debt

what happens? Do they have to remove the line items? Cease collection attempts? Pay $1000 for verifying the original dispute?

If you've proved your case, the judge will (or should) rule in your favor. They'll have to remove the TL and possibly pay statutory damages (amount depends on if the suit is FDCPA or FCRA) and court fees.