Jump to content

Litigation Notice - attorney's office or not?


Silver1
 Share

Recommended Posts

Got a letter I thought was from an attorney - okay, it sure seems like an attorney's letter, and I just assumed it was until I really looked at the name - I cut the actual name, of course. With a name like that I am not sure if this is an attorney or not but the rest of the letter seems to say that this is a law firm?

Nameless and Associates, LLC (they are in CA - I am in TX)

Nameless and Assoc LLC vs. Silver 1

case #12345

amount owed $$$$$$

Don't know who the original creditor is, it doesn't say anywhere. Just an amount owed, so I am clueless as to what this is supposed to be about. The amount runs into the thousands, though.

LITIGATION NOTICE

You have chosen to ignore our previous attempts. (well, this is the first I'm hearing from them)

You are hereby notified that a recommendation to file a lawsuit to collect this debt may be the next step resulting in a judgment against you.

A judgment is a serious legal matter. Methods to collect are available to us. These include

wage garnishment against you, your spouse, domestic partner

levy on your bank accounts/safe deposit

liens on your personal property and real property

suspension of your real estate, contractor or driver's license under certain circumstances

any of the methods mention above can be used to enforce a judgment until the total amount is paid. you will be required to pay Nameless and Assoc LLC a 10% interest on the unpaid balance of this judgment plus atty fees, court costs and processing fees.

Judgments are valid/enforceable for ten years.

To avoid further legal action you need to contact our offices within ten days of this notice. otherwise we will assume you will not pay the debt and litigation will be commenced immediately. Govern yourself accordingly.

Name

Legal Administrator

I tried looking this place up, and can't find them. I will likely contact the atty I consulted a while back on a similar problem for some advice, but curious about the forum's opinions. :) Thanks all!

Edited by Silver1
i screwed up, sorry
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is an FDCPA violation to threaten a lawsuit if they don't actually do so (unless it is paid, etc). Collectors often use very careful wording to make it sound as scary as possible without actually making that threat. Here, it comes across to me as very borderline.

You could go ahead and just treat it as a collection attempt.

If there is any chance it might be a real debt you owe, you could write to them and demand verification :evil:

If you are sure there is no debt somewhere you might owe that you lost track of or forgot about, then you could send them a cease & desist letter and be done with them 8-)

But do check your credit report in about 30 to 60 days to see if they put any derogatory items on there. If you want to head off the possibility of these, it might be better to do the DV instead of the C&D even though you are certain it's not yours. Just be prepared to be very aggressive with them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good idea - since time is of the essence I think I will go for the DV first. This is the first time I am hearing from them; I've never had any prior communications from this place before, but I know they will write they contacted you umpteen times when they haven't. :)

Thanks all :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd DV, for sure.

And, just me, but I never became too concerned when the collector was really far away from my home state. I found them to mostly be on fishing expeditions.

Collectors or JDBs from other states can hire an attorney in your state. Distance doesn't really bother them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would DV and make sure to put into the DV that this is the first communication you have received from them and that the law is clear that the 30 days starts at first communication and not before. They would then have to prove that you had actually received any communication before that time.

BV80 had a good point to, was the mini-miranda on the letter. If not, that is a violation right there regardless of anything else they might do.

Now looking at the letter, it is border line but even there, I can see some questions:

1) Attaching domestic partners - If the domestic partner is not named on the debt and the debtor is not named on the asset, what state allows any creditor to attach that asset?

2) Texas is also a very debtor friendly state. I don't think they can do wage attachments or can do anything with a homestead other than put a lien on it.

3) Interest rate - They can claim all they want but if Texas puts a cap on judgment interest rates, that is all they can charge regardless of what they want.

It sounds like these idiots are fishing for fools to pay. DV them and probably be done with them. If they do sue, you probably have some nice FDCPA violations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not from an attorney - it's from a debt collector, probably a JDB.

You are hereby notified that a recommendation to file a lawsuit to collect this debt may be the next step resulting in a judgment against you.

Attorneys don't "recommend" suing, they do it.

This letter is loaded with weasel words that are designed to make you think things that they are not actually saying. It is hard to find a hard, fast statement in this letter - every sentence has qualifies like "may" or "might", or statements that make you think they are making a threat but really aren't. I have highlighted some of them.

LITIGATION NOTICE

You have chosen to ignore our previous attempts. (well, this is the first I'm hearing from them)

You are hereby notified that a recommendation to file a lawsuit to collect this debt may be the next step resulting in a judgment against you.

Are they they threatening to sue?No, they are threatening to recommend that some other unknown,unnamed third party sue.

A judgment is a serious legal matter. Methods to collect are available to us. These include

wage garnishment against you, your spouse, domestic partner

levy on your bank accounts/safe deposit

liens on your personal property and real property

suspension of your real estate, contractor or driver's license under certain circumstances

Once again, are they actually threatening any of these actions? No, they are just saying these actions can be taken to enforce some mysterious, unknown judgment.

any of the methods mention above can be used to enforce a judgment until the total amount is paid. you will be required to pay Nameless and Assoc LLC a 10% interest on the unpaid balance of this judgment plus atty fees, court costs and processing fees.

"any of" and "can be" are not definite "will be"

Judgments are valid/enforceable for ten years.

To avoid further legal action you need to contact our offices within ten days of this notice. otherwise we will assume you will not pay the debt and litigation will be commenced immediately. Govern yourself accordingly

Legal action can be any act that is legal, like sending you a letter, going to lunch or whatever. Its opposite is "illegal action".

Trying to find a definite actual threat to sue over in this letter is like nailing Jello to the wall with the sole exception of the statement in Blue. Under the Village Idiot interpretation of FDCPA, if suit has not been filed within 20 days of the date of that letter,I would be suing them for the FDCPA violation of making a threat they do not intend to carry out - suing immediately after the 10 days. I would add a second Overshadowing violation in there - the 10 day limitation to sue overshadows your Statutory 30 days to demand VOD, as this is their first communication to you.

To make it even more fun, is there any chance this debt is Out of Statute for Collections? If so, the mere threat to sue is a FDCPA violation.

Edited by Flyingifr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not from an attorney - it's from a debt collector, probably a JDB.

Attorneys don't "recommend" suing, they do it.

This letter is loaded with weasel words that are designed to make you think things that they are not actually saying. It is hard to find a hard, fast statement in this letter - every sentence has qualifies like "may" or "might", or statements that make you think they are making a threat but really aren't. I have highlighted some of them.

Legal action can be any act that is legal, like sending you a letter, going to lunch or whatever. Its opposite is "illegal action".

Trying to find a definite actual threat to sue over in this letter is like nailing Jello to the wall with the sole exception of the statement in Blue. Under the Village Idiot interpretation of FDCPA, if suit has not been filed within 20 days of the date of that letter,I would be suing them for the FDCPA violation of making a threat they do not intend to carry out - suing immediately after the 10 days. I would add a second Overshadowing violation in there - the 10 day limitation to sue overshadows your Statutory 30 days to demand VOD, as this is their first communication to you.

To make it even more fun, is there any chance this debt is Out of Statute for Collections? If so, the mere threat to sue is a FDCPA violation.

Yeah, the weasel wording makes the letter false and/or misleading all by itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, you guys are awesome!! :)

Okay, in looking at this letter, there is only one page, writing only on the front. There isn't anything on there about, "this is an attempt to collect a debt, any information we get will be used for that, you have thirty days, etc...". I'm not certain about this 'debt' because there's nothing on there that says what it is for, who the creditor is, etc. There is no 'mini-miranda' on this one. The letter is one page, nothing on the back, looks like 'law firm' nice paper stock.

As far as this one goes; there are some old things I had that are going on six to seven years old, but I'm not recalling anything newer than that. The amount of money cited on the notice is throwing me off though. I honestly am not sure if it is mine. If they had put any creditor information I could likely know whether or not they even have the correct person. :)

Okay, so I am putting together a VOD letter (using samples here - yay!) and plan to give them 10 days to respond to my request. I will send certified, return receipt requested. Is ten days too much?

I also will make sure to mention in the letter I haven't gotten any prior communications, and the only one I'm aware of is this current one.

Thank you all very much!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote:

Originally Posted by LearningasIgo

I'd DV, for sure.

And, just me, but I never became too concerned when the collector was really far away from my home state. I found them to mostly be on fishing expeditions.

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

Collectors or JDBs from other states can hire an attorney in your state. Distance doesn't really bother them.

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

As I wrote, from my experience it "seemed" that "distance" was a factor. And as I've described more than once on this forum, when and if a distant CA was DVed and did not validate and then within a short time frame a dunning letter arrived from an in-state law firm, the dots almost connected themselves that "continued collection activities without validation" had emerged. I had this occur with Hannah who did not validate but who obtained a law firm in my home state. It was multi-tiered--Chase, to Hannah, to the in-state law firm. After letters to the FTC, to my AG, and the forwarding of the matter to my state's Office of Financial Affairs, (and the same letter sent to the respective state Bars) Hannah and the in-state law firm had to respond to my allegations. I was even sent a copy of the letter from Hannah to the Office of Financial Affairs for my perusal, where Hannah denied, of course, the involvement.

So anyway, that was my own situation which has led me to conclude: "....not to worry until something arrives from closer to home...."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no time limit on VODs except that the company cannot continue collection efforts until the answer the VOD. In fact, I would make the letter short and sweet, something to the effect of:

Dear nameless Debt Collector,

In response to your letter dated such and such date, I do not recognize this debt and am requesting verification of the debt under the FDCPA. Please also note that this is the first communication I have received from your organization.

Your name

Make sure to send it CMRRR. You do not want to get too specific because the FDCPA allows for very simple verifications to be valid. You can always send a C&D letter later and mention the violations if they do happen to verify.

They can say all they want about this letter not being the first communication. The fact is, the really cannot prove it should the issue make it to court.

Also, Flyingfir has a good point. There are already 2 violations in that letter plus another one for missing the mini-miranda. What you are going to do here is try to rack up the violations even more. Even if you cannot get more than one violation, this proves to the judge that there is a pattern of violating the law rather than a one time mistake. If they try to sue you, you can then have a counter claim which would make it hard for them to dismiss w/o prejudice when you fight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Update:

No response, no nothing at this point. No communications from them at all. I think it was a fishing expedition.

But I'm considering my next step and welcome all suggestions. :0) Assuming they do not show up on my CR - I am trying to give it 30-60 days to see if it shows up on there - I may send a copy of the letter and a complaint to the FTC and perhaps leave it at that but I haven't decided. Would love to hear your thoughts on this. Thanks all!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depends on how much you really want to go to court.

I myself would let sleeping dogs lie at this point and consider the matter closed until I received another letter. It is obvious they are not going to sue you at this juncture and it is obvious that you are not paying willingly. They can either get an attorney and file a suit against you (which would be another violation unless they send the VOD first) or they can sell the debt to the next JDB in line where you start the whole process again.

Other here however would suggest going to a NACA lawyer based on what you have and seeing if you have a case and if so, pursue it. That would bring this fishing expedition to light and you could get the debt extinguished forever. You will also end up on a list that lets other JDBs know you are willing to fight.

The decision is up to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My $00.02

I have a client working with on other matters - shes also receiving letters. I went over her house as a favor - created "Variation of Debt" letters, asking for proof the collection companies owned the debt. Sent this out, her phones calls have stopped, haven't received any more letters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Update:

No response, no nothing at this point. No communications from them at all. I think it was a fishing expedition.

But I'm considering my next step and welcome all suggestions. :0) Assuming they do not show up on my CR - I am trying to give it 30-60 days to see if it shows up on there - I may send a copy of the letter and a complaint to the FTC and perhaps leave it at that but I haven't decided. Would love to hear your thoughts on this. Thanks all!

To avoid further legal action you need to contact our offices within ten days of this notice. otherwise we will assume you will not pay the debt and litigation will be commenced immediately. Govern yourself accordingly.

The words "will" and "immediately" make the threat to sue after ten days of the date of the letter a concrete threat. Check with your County Courthouse - if they haven't started a lawsuit against you then you should "immediately" start one against them for the FDCPA violation of making a threat they have no intention of carrying out. The ten days have long expired and so has "immediately"

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.