New "sticky" request regarding DV process and lawsuits?

[secondchances]

It's been a while since I attempted to repair anyone's credit; I started with mine and then did some for friends and now I'm starting on my fiance's.  After pulling all of his reports and reviewing them and asking questions, it dawned on me that starting the credit repair process might also invite a lawsuit from creditors and collection agencies.  For instance, if you DV a creditor or a collection agency on an account that is still within the statue of limitations according to the laws of your state, might you invite them to sue you?  I'm in GA where new case law has set CC debt and auto loans for one, at the 6 year limit.  

 

My fiance's is wanting to start over but it in a precarious situation because several of his debts are within the SOL.  He was actually served on one but the case was dismissed due to the fact that they could not locate him.  So I'd really like to hear from the experts on this and perhaps make this a sticky like "How to reduce your chances of being sued while in DV" or something like that if think it is important enough.  

 

Thank you!!!  

[admin]

@secondchances - There is no way to tell if you will be sued.  You can research the company and find out how many cases they've filed maybe through Google scholar, but it's unlikely to give you certain proof.  

[secondchances]

Thanks for responding.  I know that there is no way to know if they will sue but a lot of people might start credit repair before they think to look at the SOL for their state.  I just wanted some expert opinions on whether this should be a factor in deciding when and how to repair your credit and if it is, shouldn't that be at the top of the list of instructions for people that are new to this?  If you don't think so that is fine.  Again, I'm only asking.  

 

BTW, I did find where someone posted that you should check the SOL in your states, somewhere in one of the newbie primer threads *I think* but it was was down and I was looking for it.  

 

Curious as to how many out there would DV or dispute the OC or CA within the statue of limitations because it seems risky to me.  Thanks!  

[Torden]

I believe that if your action, such as DV, is going to trigger a lawsuit, then it is likely there would eventually be a lawsuit, anyway.  All you would be doing in most cases is removing their incentives to wait longer.  If being sued later rather than sooner is your goal, then certainly reconsider what you are doing.  But, I believe little of this will make a difference between being sued and not being sued.  In cases where no action by you means you would not be sued, then I don't see how actions that show you would be costly to sue would increase that chance.  Still, there is a chance that some JDBs are so poor at record keeping that they are not going to look at yours at all, unless you do actions to make them open up that account and see that it might be worth reactivating, especially now that they know where you are.  Large balance accounts could be handled this way.  If you have moved, this could also be the case.

[admin]

@secondchances - Yes, if your debt is outside the statute of limitations, you can be a little fearless in your credit repair letters.  I will write a blog post on this soon.  

[secondchances]

Thanks ya'll!  @Torden - You make a good point with this that I had not thought about "In cases where no action by you means you would not be sued, then I don't see how actions that show you would be costly to sue would increase that chance."   

 

If I send a letter CMRR stating that I dispute the debt and it is sent outside of the window of the 30 dunning letter, they don't have to validate correct?  But if they don't and they try to sue, then I do have an instant FDCPA violation.  So I guess there are advantages and disadvantages to laying low and standing up for your rights.  One of his creditors is Calvary and I see that they are busy with the lawsuits these days.  

[Credator]

Thanks ya'll!  @Torden - You make a good point with this that I had not thought about "In cases where no action by you means you would not be sued, then I don't see how actions that show you would be costly to sue would increase that chance."   

 

If I send a letter CMRR stating that I dispute the debt and it is sent outside of the window of the 30 dunning letter, they don't have to validate correct?  But if they don't and they try to sue, then I do have an instant FDCPA violation.  So I guess there are advantages and disadvantages to laying low and standing up for your rights.  One of his creditors is Calvary and I see that they are busy with the lawsuits these days.  

I don't recall there being an instant violation for suing instead of responding to a validation request.

 

OC's seem to be business partners with the attorneys that have filed suit against me. Their behavior does not mirror anything having to do with smart business. They have taken an average of about two years of involved litigation prior to losing to me. They should have known from day one that the alleged debt was uncollectible whether they prevailed in obtaining a judgment or not. Yet they soldiered on and spent a lot of resources litigating against me. FAIK a JDB may run something closer to smart business analysis and use ROI calculations to determine whether to sue or not to sue and/or when to cut losses efficiently.

 

My experience with DV letters to OC's DC attorneys is that there is no casual relationship for a DV letter precipitating or preventing a lawsuit. Two OC DC attorneys dunned, one DV letter sent, and two lawsuits followed. While two data points are insignificant I would be surprised if there is a predictable pattern across multiple companies in controlling whether a suit is filed or not through the non use/use of DV letters. An individual company may have a detectable pattern in regard to DV letters and lawsuits, if enough data points can be collected.

 

If I get a dunning letter from a party they will get a timely DV letter. Whether they sue or not is a decision I leave to them.

 

DV letters are good for free "discovery" and may trip up lawbreaking collectors in documenting a violation or two IMHO. I have used them for both. As to their ability to precipitate or prevent lawsuits I have not experienced that.

[admin]

@Credator @secondchances

 

I don't recall there being an instant violation for suing instead of responding to a validation request.

 

Agreed.