Hello everyone,
Early last month I received a collection letter from a company known as Lakewalk, LLC which had been assigned by Chase Bank USA. I sent a request for validation letter as is commonly suggested. Last week I received a response from Lakewalk which lists Chase Bank USA, a credit card number, and an assigned amount. They also listed the following:
"In response to your letter dated October 10th, 2011, we have conferred with our client and they have confirmed the validity of this debt.
"[V]erification of a debt requires nothing more than the debt collector confirming in writing that the amount being demanded is what the creditor is claiming is owed." Clark v. Capital Credit & Collection Servs., 460 F.3d 1162, 1174 (9th Cir.2006); citing, Chaudhry v. Gallerizzo, 174 F.3d 394, 406 (4th Cir.1999), and, FDCPA Section 809, Validation of debts, 15 U.S.C. Section 1692g."
The letter closes listing Chase Bank as the original creditor and provides their P.O. Box address.
How shall I respond to this letter? It seems they've done everything required of the FDCPA but many people say they must send documentation from the creditor, statements, payment history, or a signed contract?
Debt Samaritan
Posts: 16655
Credits: 297112.40101251 Send message to SOAPLADY
Were you disputing the debt or any portion of it? Have you verified yourself with chase that the account has been placed?
DV's can sometimes backfire, suggesting that you are being difficult and can result in the account going directly to litigation.
http://www.debtconsolidationcare.com...allenders.html
PDL's are ILLEGAL in the following states...
AR, AZ, CT, GA, ME, MD, MA, NJ, NY, NC, PA, VT AND DC
OH AND NH have very restrictive low cost interest rate laws.
SOL for all states
http://www.debtconsolidationcare.com...imitation.html
Debt Samaritan
Posts: 234
Credits: 2716.75 Send message to Lian
FDCPA 809(b) is vague on what contitutes adequate validation, so in the end, it all comes down to how the courts interpret the statute. They are all over the place.
Debt validation as defined by legal precedent is valid only in the federal curcuit in which the appellate court ruling was issued. The 4th circuit embraces the central Atlantic states, and the 9th circuit embraces the Pacific coast states. The entent to which they are consistent with federal appellate decisions in your residence jurisdiction is something for which you need legal advice. Most jurisdictions now support the general premise that validation requires only what was provided in their letter.
They now consider validation to have been provided, and are thus able to continue collection activities. If you feel their validation is inadequate, recourse is to bring legal action for violation of section 809(b) for violation of their cease collection bar once they resume any collection activities.
Posts: 2
Credits: 201.2 Send message to HeadMongoose
The debt they are trying to collect is about 2 years old and the SOL in Arizona is for 3 years. Would you suggest ceasing communication and trying to sit out 1 more year? The amount is about $600 and might not be worth litigation? Not to mention resetting the SOL?
Debt Samaritan
Posts: 16655
Credits: 297112.40101251 Send message to SOAPLADY
SOL for open ended accounts changed in Arizona in april of this year to 6 years.
http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/50leg/1...vernor.doc.htm
Cease and desist doesnt stop them from suing you....in fact in a lot of cases will speed it up. And the legal costs get passed onto the debtor.
http://www.debtconsolidationcare.com...allenders.html
PDL's are ILLEGAL in the following states...
AR, AZ, CT, GA, ME, MD, MA, NJ, NY, NC, PA, VT AND DC
OH AND NH have very restrictive low cost interest rate laws.
SOL for all states
http://www.debtconsolidationcare.com...imitation.html
Posts: 2
Credits: 201.2 Send message to HeadMongoose
Oh geez, I didn't know about that legislation.
I guess, in that case, I'll have to make some other arrangements.
Being that Chase assigned this CA can I go directly to Chase and try to work something out with them?
Add new comment