Sign in to follow this  
h8spleadingpaper

30 Day Limit on Debt Validation?

Recommended Posts

Hi, everyone.

 

I'm very glad to have found this site and now that I've learned about DV, I'd like to try to apply it to a few charge-off accounts currently in the hands of CAs.  One thing I don't understand is the 30-day limit for responding to their original collection notification with a DV.  Let's say you've been getting letters from a CA for 6 months without knowing that you have a right to DV or to dispute the charge.  If you've never contacted the CA about the debt and never signed for anything acknowledging that you've received info about the account, how can they possibly enforce this?  Knowing about the 30 day limit (as they surely do), every crooked CA out there could just reject every DV request they ever receive by claiming that they had sent out a notice previously (that they never had) and that the 30-day window had been missed.

 

Anyone?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortuneatly, according to the courts, the CA doesn't have to prove you got the letter...they only need to show they have procedure in place for sending them.  YOU on the other, need to always send your DV letters Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested (CMRRR) to prove you sent it...and, reference the CMRRR number in the letter and keep a copy for your records.

 

You can always send a DV, but if they don't receive it within 30 days of their first contact, they can assume the debt is valid and continue trying to collect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, shoot.  Okay, thanks.

 

I also have an opinion question, for anyone who wants to chime in.  I have some accounts that I was considering sending a DV request on first, then eventually asking for a settle-for-delete if they come back with the valid information (I have no problem with settling on these accounts, as long as the amount is reasonable, like 50% or less, and I can get the listing removed from the CRAs).  

But now I'm starting to read some threads that indicate that the CAs are answering DVs with lawsuits.  If I'm okay with settling eventually anyway, should I not run the risk of sending DV requests and having them trigger immediate lawsuits?  Does anyone know if this sort of thing has become common practice among CAs?  My previous outlook was, "Well, I have a right to ask for a DV and it can't hurt, just slow down the process."  Now I'm starting to think it can hurt, since I don't want to deal with court if I can avoid it.  

 

Lastly, if a CA was to agree to a settle-for-delete or NDA but the only listing on my credit report for the debt was made by the OC, can the agreement with the CA have any affect on the listing?  If not and my main goal is to try to pay to get that listing off of my credit report, do I have any other option than to try to get the OC to get the account back in their hands and arrange a settle-for-delete agreement with them?  I can't imagine they'd be willing to do this, since they've already gotten the tax benefits of a charge-off...

 

Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 CAs are answering DVs with lawsuits

 

If the CA sends a collection notice, the 1st one should have on it you have 30 days to ask for validation.  If you do not, then they assume the debt is valid.  If they send you another letter, read and see if it has that same 30 day disclaimer, some do. if it does DV them. 

If you send a DV responding to the 30 days and they file suit, you can counter sue for an FDCPA violation.  But if you just DV them, they can choose to 1. ignore you, 2. file suit, 3. sell the debt.  It does not mean they will just file on you.  If they are activly collecting, most will send you the validation. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info, Shellie98.


 


I checked, but none of the recent notices have the 30-day disclaimer on them.  If only I'd known about DV sooner!  Oh, well.  On to the next step:  attempt pay-for-delete or settlement with NDA...


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

or wait for a lawsuit and then fight them. ;) Hey, just listing all your options here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha!  Thanks Shellie98, but I don't think I have the strong stomach for court that other folks here seem to have!  I found out last night that a lawyer representing one of the CAs filed a suit with the local court a couple of weeks ago (without ever even trying to serve me a summons, btw) and is probably trying to get a default judgment as we speak.  Weasel!  :-(

 

Don't want to have to go through this more than once.  :-o

 

Thanks again for your time.  

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think anyone here has the stomach for it, but it is better than paying a junk debt buyer for an account he paid pennies on the dollar.  You may owe the money, but you don't owe it to them.  Unless it is a suit by the original creditor, you should consider fighting it with help from here.  Lots of california people here to help you along. 

 

They probably just haven't gotten around to serving you yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha!  Thanks Shellie98, but I don't think I have the strong stomach for court that other folks here seem to have!  I found out last night that a lawyer representing one of the CAs filed a suit with the local court a couple of weeks ago (without ever even trying to serve me a summons, btw) and is probably trying to get a default judgment as we speak.  Weasel!   :(

 

Don't want to have to go through this more than once.   :eek:

 

Thanks again for your time.  

@ - if you're being sued, the time for DV is over.  I'd work on filing your answer.  This won't go away.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, Admin Big Sis.

 

Yeah, thanks.  I realize that a DV won't work on the one account that I'm apparently being sued over, just trying to think of how to address the other ones on my credit report before THEY get the same idea.  :-o  Time to get my butt in gear and try to be proactive.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From my experience with DV letters they are neither reliable in preventing nor causing lawsuits.

 

Opposing has no "stomach issues" whatsoever regarding suing consumers via a DC attorney. Being afraid of a lawsuit/arbitration is typical and normal FAIK. Showing that fear or acting on that fear removes a good portion of the bargaining power in arranging a favorable settlement. IMHO.

 

I like DV letters to document possible violations as well as a bit of "free" discovery but I do not see how they do much to assist a party if that party truly had no stomach for litigation or arbitration.

 

In my efforts regarding negotiation I prefer honesty and leverage, lots of leverage.

 

Leverage to me may mean things like:

Gee Mr./Ms. DC attorney I have no money and you cannot get paid, ever. Have you had a chance to review my litigation record?

My willingness to stop litigation only after I win or the highest court of appeals refuses to hear my arguments on the errors made.

I have fully documented in and for the court record the DC attorney and their client's contradictory and material lies.

 

In arbitration the leverage appears to be the cost to opposing which can be a deterrent on smaller alleged debts especially JDBs that pay 5 cents on the dollar for alleged debt. I am not a fan of the limited-to-none appeal process typically available in arbitration. That and from my experience...

In Arbitration No One Can Hear You ScreamTM

 

Without leverage and a bit of a stomach I would think it would be difficult to negotiate a very favorable settlement. In a serious negotiation I prefer honesty over bluffing but some may have had some success with bluffing. IDK

 

It may be possible to find a competent attorney to negotiate on one's behalf but I am unsure how that might work out if they fail to reach a settlement with the DC within the total available budget alloted. Hiring an attorney is a negotiation. As always, get it in writing.

 

Then again if that competent attorney routinely beats JDBs they might be a good person to just pay to give the JDB a bit of "tummy trouble".

  • Like 1

Share this post


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