Internet's first get-out-of-debt community - 134,000 members

Hi -

I have been posting here awhile under Saxwoman as a Guest, but with the help of Wulf, I registered today. I am sure you will be hearing more from me, because the Rannefeld situation hasn't really improved. They harassed me by phone for almost a month in conversation and recorded messages ... before I finally sent a DV letter (the one posted by JMCENT, I believe, wherein it asks for about 11 pieces of validation information and a cease and desist), certified return receipt. I have copies of the letter as well, of course.

They received it and signed for it on 4/7 and actually called later that day. I figured, "maybe they didn't open it right away... that's excusable." But about a week later, they called 2 times back to back and left a message on the second call, telling me that my 30 days was up and that the "information has been processed," but that I still must "call back immediately."

Then I received a package from them in the mail yesterday. The top sheet is a letter on Legal letterhead "Rannefeld and Associates," but signed by the Gen. Manager. It's an "Offer of Settlement and Release" letter. Attached were copies of all my statements from the original creditor... but none of the other DV items requested (such as showing that they are allowed to collect in my state, copy of the original debt contract, etc).

They also included a copy of the proposal sent from CCCS to the original creditor and the only thing written on it was "reject." I am still sending payments through CCCS and the original creditor is accepting them, but didn't re-age the account or lower interest. It may also be important to note that the amount owed listed on the paperwork is incorrect and doesn't reflect the 3 payments I made recently to CCCS and the orig. creditor.

There was even a copy of the check/letter sent from CCCS to the original creditor and had 2 other account numbers and names of people enrolled in the program with the same company... seems like I shouldn't be privy to those individual's information if you ask me.

All in all, I think this CA/attorney is a complete disaster. They didn't send over the right DV paperwork... even gave me other people's personal information (probably would upset CCCS a great deal). Seems like they broke the law when they called me both times and even left recorded messages.

What does everyone else think? Do I have a case here?

Also, I would like to file formal complaints with BBB/FTC or whatever-other-acronym-organizations there are out there. How do I go about that?

so... to recap...

1) does it seem like I have a legal case?
2) should i file formal complaints with organizations, and if so, how do I follow through with those?

Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2008 5:19 pm Subject:

I can not understand why your payments aren't showing and yes you definately hjave a nightmare going on here. It almost sounds like you may need someone to help you settle this once and for all. Try and see if you can talk to someone about a legal case. I hope it all works out.

Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2008 7:58 pm Subject:

You can request validation at any time. Why else would they send you one of the items you requested? If they have legitimate claim to this debt or are managing it for the original creditor then they should have no problem producing those documents. However they are having a problem abiding by the FDCPA with the issue of ceasing collection activity until validation has been presented to the consumer.

Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2008 8:29 pm Subject:

also, for them to send an offer of settlement without validating first, isn't that a violation as well?

Posted: Sun Apr 20, 2008 9:51 pm Subject:

Yes Saxwoman2, it is as it is continued collection activity.

Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 10:12 pm Subject:

but is their sloppy envelope of *statements only* considered validation? that is the question...

i would venture to say they *think* they've validated. the settlement letter was attached with a paperclip on top of the statements.

Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 10:13 pm Subject:

but is their sloppy envelope of *statements only* considered validation? that is the question...

i would venture to say they *think* they've validated. the settlement letter was attached with a paperclip on top of the statements.

Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 8:53 am Subject:

Sending only statements shows they have statements. But it does not show they own the debt. They would also have to produce at least a copy of the original contract with your signature as well as either an assignment contract or bill of sale. If they purchased it from another collection agency you could challenge the chain of custody by requesting a bill of sale from them as well going back to the original creditor.

procollect · Posted: Tue May 06, 2008 4:56 pm Subject: mistaken

you are wrong by sending the statements that is the validation of debt. You seem to have clamied not a valid debtor as it came out of thin air but seems they provided proof of the statements and probably the mailings. Rannefeld is not a debt buyer they are a law firm that debt buyers retain to sue for debts or collect and silly rabbit they dont have to send all 11 docs only statements sounds like to me your own your way headed to court soon especially since they reject your cccs offer which rannefeld would never accept anyways. Your payments probably arent showing up because there probably sending them to the wrong place or are giving you false statements which many cccs companies due they are the biggest one of the biggest rip off companies out there cccs can not do anything they dont own the debt and since rannefeld is involved they mean nothing dont even matter you might need to look info a debt settlement company because rannefeld doesnt participate in cccs programs. You dont have a case you seem to have failed to pay your debt and now are looking for a way to change the terms of the original contract which doesnt happen the balance always due plus interest attorney fees or court cost look at your contract

Posted: Tue May 06, 2008 5:25 pm Subject:

Ugh, Procollect, if you're going to try making a point on these forums could you please check your grammar? I got a migraine just reading the first few sentences of your post.

And guess what? You're wrong. I remember reading somewhere, I do believe it was in this forum, that providing copies of statements is not considered proper validation. In my opinion anyone can obtain copies of statements these days, or even doctor some up using a halfway decent word processing or publishing program. So I hardly think that is all that needs to be provided for proper validation!

You mentioned for us to look at our contract. Well, there should be two copies of said contract; I should have one and the Creditor/CA should have one. So why is it so hard for them to produce a copy of said contract when validation is requested? If all the terms and conditions are so conveniently located on the copy they are referencing when they collect/sue me for this alleged debt, then they should just be able to pop it through a copy machine and send me a copy when I request it.

Hopefully someone legitimate, and that can use the "Kings English" correctly, that can either back me up or correct me will be along to do so.

Posted: Tue May 06, 2008 5:51 pm Subject:

Unemployed Ron you are correct in what you have read that providing statements is not proper validation.

I wonder why procollect doesn't register as a real user..seems to have too much time on their hands and nothing better to do then pick apart people's posts.

I am sure that if someone called them or sent them a collection letter saying they owed all of this money they just wouldn't take their word for it. They would want some concrete evidence, especially with all of the scams going around.

Posted: Tue May 06, 2008 6:32 pm Subject:

LadyBug! Thanks for that, I wouldn't want to be accused of giving out inaccurate information.

You know, what you say makes absolute sense. If I were to receive a call from someone claiming to be a CA advising they were collecting X amount of dollars on a debt that may or may not be mine. I would definitely not just take the word of some stranger calling over the phone like that and just start handing over my money. I would need to see some sort of proof the debt is mine and how they arrived at the amount they claim I owe. I would also need to see some sort of backup that confirms I'm required to pay this person for the debt and not the original creditor, that is if the debt is even mine.

Why don't I just open my bank account up (all $6.00 of it) and just let you go in and take what you want Mr. Procollect? Would you do the same for me if I called you? I think not.

If you would, though, can I have your phone number? Being unemployed and broke really sucks and I could use some extra cash about now.

Guest · Posted: Tue May 06, 2008 9:49 pm Subject:

Is this company out of Texas? If so, procollector should know they ARE debt collectors. I found some info on budd hibbs site on him and also he is Blue Rannefeld dba Rannefeld & Associates. I think he is also bonded with Texas. This company looks like bad news, check into it.

Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 5:13 am Subject:

I know they are also debt collectors as well. I pulled their business license before on PDF from the state dept. of commerce.

Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 5:28 am Subject:

See Us Supreme court Heinz vs Jenkins.Any law firm that regularly collects debts is a debt collector by definition. Now I need to become very unpopular here and warn everybody. They can make very valid claims in court with just statements provided the statements are from the creditor,address & identifying info is correct,and balance matches what they are claiming. Most states have ruled in court that if you use a credit card,you are agreeing to the terms of the account providing that it was you who made charges and account was not compromised. If a collector responds with statements from creditor and correct balance info,I would call it validated under most circumstances.Without a written contract would just limit the lawyer from brimging suit under breech of contract.The statements would support a account stated claim.

Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 6:16 am Subject:

OK, Cajun, thanks for that. It certainly puts things into perspective regarding debt validation.

I had heard there was some confusion on the part of courts as to what exactly constitutes proper debt validation. I thought it had been clarified, across the board, that statement copies alone were not sufficient. I guess I misunderstood.

Don't know why you would think that would make you unpopular? Clarifying something or correcting a misunderstanding? I, for one, appreciate it.

Now my question is, what exactly is the difference between a "breach of contract" and an "account stated" claim? Would they be handled in different court venues? I'm just curious. Can they get even more money from you, if they win, with one as opposed to the other? Or is it just a different way of accomplishing the same task: forcing someone to pay a debt?

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

	* denotes required field

Internet's first get-out-of-debt community - 134,000 members

Rannefeld & Associates - Formal Complaint

Members Area

Free Debt Counseling

Ask the community

Featured Discussions

Featured Articles

Question of the Month

Also See

Recent Forum Discussions

Recent Blog Post