Internet's first get-out-of-debt community - 122,000 members

I have sent a request for verification to a CA asking for the following:

What the money you say I owe is for;
Explain and show me how you calculated what you say I owe;
Provide me with copies of any papers that show I agreed to pay what you say I owe;
Provide a verification or copy of any judgment if applicable;
Identify the original creditor;
Prove the Statute of Limitations has not expired on this account
Show me that you are licensed to collect in my state
Provide me with your license numbers and Registered Agent
Proof that the collection company owns the debt/or has been assigned the debt. (You are legally entitled to collect this particular debt from me.)
Complete payment history, starting with the original creditor. (I need to have proof of my payment history with original Creditor,
what the amount of the debt was when the creditor assigned the debt to your company,
and what fees/interest has been tacked on to this debt and how you/they determined these fees.) or credit card application. (My contract with the original creditor establishing the debt between us.)

They have responded by sending me the original contract with the original creditor but none of the other information I requested i.e. payment history or how they calculated what they say i owe. Or if they even own the debt themselves. They say I owe $10,000 and the original debt totals less then $2000 in the paperwork they sent. Can I demand for a second time they provide this information?

Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 1:52 am Subject:

I think you can DV them again for a better answer. When they didn't give proper answer then it means that they don't have those information with them.

Posted: Tue Jun 24, 2008 6:23 am Subject:

They are not really required to reply with that laundry list you have going there.The original contract will show legal documentation of ownership of debt(you). I would request a cost breakdown as that is needed to make sure all charges & fees are legal.

Guest · Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 5:00 pm Subject:

The also must prove that they are the legal owners of the debt, and that they are licensed to collect in your state.

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 4:01 am Subject:

It does not state in law that they must provide all that garbage.I still stand firm that the contract is sufficient and the remaining item needed is a complete cost break down to see how balance was determined.

Observer · Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 5:35 am Subject:

Cajun, you raise an interesting point. Not to play the bad guy here, but all the DV letters floating around on this site ask for all of those items. If they arent required by law to provide all of those items, shouldnt there be some clean up of the DV letter template that is posted here? Just a suggestion.

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 8:55 am Subject:

1. What the money you say I owe is for;
2. Explain and show me how you calculated what you say I owe;
3. Provide me with copies of any papers that show I agreed to pay what you say I owe;
4. Provide a verification or copy of any judgment if applicable;
5. Identify the original creditor;
6. Prove the Statute of Limitations has not expired on this account
7. Show me that you are licensed to collect in my state
8. Provide me with your license numbers and Registered Agent
9. Proof that the collection company owns the debt/or has been assigned the debt. (You are legally entitled to collect this particular debt from me.)
10. Complete payment history, starting with the original creditor. (I need to have proof of my payment history with original Creditor,
11. what the amount of the debt was when the creditor assigned the debt to your company,
12. what fees/interest has been tacked on to this debt and how you/they determined these fees.) or credit card application. (My contract with the original creditor establishing the debt between us.)

I think Cajun is correct. I think the current DV letter is pretty solid but the problem in this case is the CA has the original contract with the original creditor which I think is pretty strong evidence if they take you to court. That paper takes care of points 1,3,5 and probably 9. I think they need to still show the math behind their numbers like Cajun said which would take care of points 2 and 12 firmly and also probably points 10 and 11. Point 4 means nothing unless they say they have a judgment. Obviously they can't provide it if one doesnt exist. Point 6 only means something if you claim it as a defense. Finally, I always thought points 7 and 8 were kind of BS anyways but it kind of depends on your state law.

Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 9:07 am Subject:

I usually research whether or not they have a bond posted with the TX SOS before I send the DV. If they do, I include the bonding info in my DV. If I can't find a record of one or their bond has been cancelled or revoked, I Cc: the Office of the Secretary of State on the DV as well with a little note about the CA doing business in his state w/out the required $10,000 bond. I've never heard anything back from those CA's (4 so far)so I don't know if it worked or not but it gave me a kick to do it... Wink

Guest · Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 9:57 am Subject:

Under the FDCPA statute, what are we really entitled to that would suffice as validation?

Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 3:00 am Subject:

The CA's stance in the situation can be thrown into serious question without a assignment contract or bill of sale. It's called the chain of custody, and when challenged (especially when it comes to junk debt buyers) it can be a real crap storm for them.

Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 3:29 am Subject:

Laundry list. That's funny CajunBullDog.

You know, my rule of thumb is to ask for more than I actually want/need. The things I would absolutely have to see, at minimum, from them, in order for me to consider it validated, is a signed contract (with my actual signature on it, and not just one of those generic dealies that doesn't even have my name on it), A complete financial transaction history of the account up to and including what the CA's charging, and the proof they are entitled to collect the debt (ie bill of sale/proof of assignment).

Now, i'm not sure if that is what a court would require; however, it's my own personal requirement. I'm just not going to take some CA's half baked validation, as in a few copies of statements, as a factual representation of what I owe and that I should even be paying them and not the OC. That is if they managed to even produce a signed contract.

Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 5:45 am Subject:

Under the FDCPA statute, what are we really entitled to that would suffice as validation?

That's the million dollar question that has been argued over and over on every board I've been too and has caused some friction between forum members. Per sec 809 of the FDCPA, validation is:

(b) 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.

That is minimally enhanced by the FTC Wollman opinion:

The statute requires that the debt collector obtain verification of the debt and mail it to the consumer (emphasis mine). Because one of the principal purposes of this Section is to help consumers who have been misidentified by the debt collector or who dispute the amount of the debt, it is important that the verification of the identity of the consumer and the amount of the debt be obtained directly from the creditor. Mere itemization of what the debt collector already has does not accomplish this purpose. As stated above, the statute requires the debt collector, not the creditor, to mail the verification to the consumer.

Unfortunately, FTC opinion letters are not binding on a court, a CA or a JDB. Personally, of all the DV's I have sent out over the past year, only once have I gotten more than a printout on the CA(JDB's) letterhead. I DV'd FRS on DW's Discover and received the original signed app from Discover follwed by several settlement offers straight from the OC. Never heard from the CA again. On the others, I send follow up DV's informing them their validation is not acceptable but still haven't received any "real" validation. We can demand the world, but until a court makes a landmark ruling on what constitutes validation, we're not going to get it outside of the discovery phase of litigation.

Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 7:13 am Subject:

And yet another argument in favor of the FDCPA needing a complete overhaul!

I guess when MBNA wrote their proposed BK law, and had their man in the White House sign the end result into law, they weren't too worried on strengthening consumer rights in the process. Only about looking after themselves. So I might recommend contacting your representatives in Washington, DC and telling them we need the FDCPA overhauled with more clarification added, much stronger protection against CA's walking all over debtors, and MUCH tougher penalties when they do violate it.

$1000.00 is not a deterrent at all for CA's that violate the FDCPA, it's just the cost of doing business to them.

Posted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 12:38 pm Subject:

Your right Ron, they need to clarify the requirements of proper validation so this does not need to be questioned so much on either side. The statute needs to be enhanced with further definition.

*Name:
*Email:
*Phone:
*Zip:
Debt

	* denotes required field

Internet's first get-out-of-debt community - 122,000 members

Is this a complete & valid debt validation response?

Members Area

Free Debt Counseling

Ask the community

Featured Discussions

Featured Articles

Question of the Month

Useful Links

Recent Forum Discussions

Recent Blog Post