| Message |
Author |
Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2008 5:13 am Subject: |
|
|
OK, so now I'm really confused. From what I'm reading then, the CA's have a way of getting around this 30-day right to dispute by filing a lawsuit?
Maybe I'm overanalyzing it, and I'm certainly not expert so I hope someone can clear it up for me.
|
|
FloridaRon

Joined: 13 Oct 2007
Posts: 701
Debtcc Points: 5222
|
|
|
|
JCEMT
Moderator


Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 2997
Debtcc Points: 27046
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2008 6:42 am Subject: |
|
|
Many "law offices" are really collection agencies who have borrowed a license. If they make you think that they are lawyers, even without saying so, they can be liable for practicing law without a license. I am involved in such a case right now! I thought I was talking to a lawyer or paralegal until I heard all the call center noise in the backgroung. Turns out it was a rent a lawyer agency!
|
|
frogpatch
Moderator

Joined: 09 Apr 2007
Posts: 3573
Debtcc Points: 30245
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 14, 2008 7:55 am Subject: |
|
|
But if you read it like that, if it isn't considered initial communication, then there had to have been communication BEFORE they filed suit. Since a lawsuit is considered collection activity, it would trigger another part of the FCRA and FDCPA.
_________________ Check out my credit repair blog. http://goldenbast.yesdebtfree.org/
|
|
goldenbast
Debt Samaritan

Joined: 21 Aug 2007
Posts: 903
Debtcc Points: 14043
|
|
|