Sign in to follow this  
graym

How does Debt Validation apply to co-signers?

Recommended Posts

Well, do what you think you need to, but, under the FDCPA, they only need to respond with the OC's name, the account number, and the amount...and they only need do that if its within 30 days of the initial communication.

So...at this point...your choices are a complete C&D or write them a check.

 

That's only for debt validation.  It doesn't have anything to do with harassment or attempting to collect upon a debt that is not in default.  The documentation we have shows that she was making payments to the servicer of the loan prior to the date they listed as the charge-off date.  An accounting of the debt prior to default would be required by them to show how these payments were being applied to this loan and what caused this loan to enter default.  We have stated to them we believe this loan was not in default.  They are the ones stating that the loan went into default. Therefore, the burden of showing that this loan was in default despite proof of payments made to the servicer prior to their date of default, rests upon their shoulders.  I believe it is a violation to continue collection on a loan that is not in default.  Proof of payment to the servicer prior to the charge-off date is certainly enough evidence to not only support a counter-suit, but to cast serious doubts upon their claim of default as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everything you say is true...but...you'll have to present that in court and have the judge agree. a good consumer lawyer might be able to sue them under the FDCPA, the FCRA, and the TCPA, but you're not going scare them off with your letter. And anything you say over the phone didn't happen unless you record it.

For $17,000, they'll probably file suit...use sewer service to bury the subpoena...and get a default judgment from an overworked judge.

So, good luck. I'm done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@graym

 

Just be sure to understand that they're not required to provide what you've requested.  It's also not guaranteed that your demand for only one call a day must be heeded.  The language in 1692c states that a debt collector can't call at a time or place KNOWN to be inconvenient.   You didn't specify a time that is not convenient. 

 

I believe it is a violation to continue collection on a loan that is not in default.

 

 

If the debt went into collection and/or was charged off, it was in default. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everything you say is true...but...you'll have to present that in court and have the judge agree. a good consumer lawyer might be able to sue them under the FDCPA, the FCRA, and the TCPA, but you're not going scare them off with your letter. And anything you say over the phone didn't happen unless you record it.

For $17,000, they'll probably file suit...use sewer service to bury the subpoena...and get a default judgment from an overworked judge.

So, good luck. I'm done.

 

Sorry for my wordy responses that led to this misunderstanding, but your amount is not correct.  The original contract was for $14,300.  She has already paid them around $15,100, which doesn't include payments she made to the original servicer, just to them.  Their accounting of what is owed started from what they state is the charge-off amount of $17,800 or so.  They state that she has paid them about $11,100 towards the principle, and about $4,000 towards interest leaving a remaining balance owed of around $6,000 (now $6,300 with interest).  That's what they are currently demanding in full, the $6,300.

 

All we are saying is we want to know how the loan went from the contract amount of $14,300 to the amount they started calculating from of $17,800.   A difference of around $4,000 with interest. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@graym

 

Just be sure to understand that they're not required to provide what you've requested.  It's also not guaranteed that your demand for only one call a day must be heeded.  The language in 1692c states that a debt collector can't call at a time or place KNOWN to be inconvenient.   You didn't specify a time that is not convenient. 

 

 

If the debt went into collection and/or was charged off, it was in default. 

 

We did specify a time that was inconvenient.  We stated the hours he is at work, and stated that he considers calls at work inconvenient.  We can change the paragraph to be more clear though. 

 

I can clearly see that the loan went into default, but that doesn't mean it's not possible it went into default in error.  She was making payments to the servicer of the loan, all we are saying is it's quite possible that the servicer misapplied the payments and the loan incorrectly entered default.  For example, let's say each loan had a minimum payment due of $200, and she makes a payment of $400.  The servicer applies a $400 payment to one loan, and $0 to the other loan instead of applying the payment split between both loans.  In her case, the lower interest loan stayed current, and the higher interest loan defaulted.   I wouldn't be surprised if they have a company policy to apply payments to the lowest interest loans first.  No different than credit card companies that used to apply your payments to your biggest purchases first, instead of in the order the purchases were made, so that they could hit you with tons of overage charges when all the smaller charges hit your account. 

 

Another hypothetical scenario is that she was making monthly payments, but she was only paying enough to cover 1 loan.  Each month, the payment was then being applied to the lower interest first, and nothing was being applied to the higher interest loan.   The servicer could easily have alternated payments to keep both loans slightly late, but current.  Instead, chose to apply each successive months payments to the lower interest loan only allowing the higher interest loan to default.  We don't know exactly what happened which caused this loan to enter default, but we do know that payments were being made to the servicer of both loans and therefore there is a possibility that it was entered into default in error.

 

I'm also well aware they don't have to provide any of this documentation.  As I said, it was merely a suggestion to try to make them think twice about filing a suit.  However, like someone said, they probably won't even read it so I think I will just trim it down to the very basics:

 

1) Phone calls at work are inconvenient.

2) Provide a full accounting of the debt so that we may determine what, if anything, is still owed and so that we may see how our payments to the original servicer were being applied to determine if the loan possibly entered default in error.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'm also well aware they don't have to provide any of this documentation.  As I said, it was merely a suggestion to try to make them think twice about filing a suit.  However, like someone said, they probably won't even read it so I think I will just trim it down to the very basics:

 

1) Phone calls at work are inconvenient.

2) Provide a full accounting of the debt so that we may determine what, if anything, is still owed and so that we may see how our payments to the original servicer were being applied to determine if the loan possibly entered default in error.

 

NOTHING will deter them from filing a suit if that is their intention.  

 

1)  if they continue to call at work it might be a violation.

 

2)  Since they do not have to provide that unless they do sue you I would expect that you do not hear a response from them.

 

Something about all of this just is not adding up.   Both myself and a couple of others have researched and found at least a half dozen or more consumer attorneys willing to sue National Collegiate Trust due to their illegal practices.  Why would she not just turf this to a consumer lawyer and let them handle it?  Getting a lawyer involved is the one thing that has a good chance of deterring them from suing.  It also stands a good chance that they comply with the request for the full accounting if it comes from a lawyer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based upon feedback, this is the re-worded version:

 

Name

Date

Address

City, Zip

 

Weltman, Weinberg & Reis

3705 Marlane Drive

Grove City, Ohio 43123-8895
WWR No.: 00000000

 

Certified Mail: 0000 0000 0000 0000 0000

 

DEBT DISPUTE LETTER

Dear Weltman, Weinberg & Reis,

 

I work during the hours of 9AM and 5PM and am not allowed to accept calls at work. Therefore, please do not call me between the hours of 9AM and 5PM as these calls are inconvenient for me.

 

The documents you have provided to us do not verify that any amount is owed on this loan. As you can see from your documentation, we have made payments in excess of $15,000 which exceeds the amount of the original contract. Therefore, this contract has been paid in full. To determine if any additional amount is owed, it requires a full accounting starting from the contract amount so that we may verify that any additional charges were properly added pursuant to the terms of the contract.

 

Additionally, we would like to see how our payments to the servicer were being applied to this loan and that we were properly receiving credit for our payments. We believe this loan might have entered default in error due to an incorrect application of our payments by the servicer of the loan. We were unaware that this loan had entered default due to the fact we had been making payments at all times.

 

For the reasons stated above, we request an accounting of this loan from the contract amount and until such time as you can provide this documentation to us so that we may verify your claims that any amount is owed, we will consider this contract as satisfied and this debt as having been paid in full.

 

Sincerely,
Name

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NOTHING will deter them from filing a suit if that is their intention.  

 

1)  if they continue to call at work it might be a violation.

 

2)  Since they do not have to provide that unless they do sue you I would expect that you do not hear a response from them.

 

Something about all of this just is not adding up.   Both myself and a couple of others have researched and found at least a half dozen or more consumer attorneys willing to sue National Collegiate Trust due to their illegal practices.  Why would she not just turf this to a consumer lawyer and let them handle it?  Getting a lawyer involved is the one thing that has a good chance of deterring them from suing.  It also stands a good chance that they comply with the request for the full accounting if it comes from a lawyer.

 

Well the last debt collector that sued my girlfriend is likely regretting it.  That case is currently on its 2nd Appeal and the debt collectors court ordered response is due to the District Court of Appeals next week.  I'll post the details after she wins though :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this