Portfolio Recovery Ass idea of validation
Date: Sat, 01/19/2008 - 19:39
It states briefly that "courts have stated that verification of a debt involves 'nothing more than the debt collector confirm in writing that the amount being demanded is what the creditor is claiming is owed.'" Then they reference Azar v Hayter, Chaudry v Gallerizzo, Smith v Transworld, Graziano v Harrison and Mahon v Credit Bureau of Placer County, Inc. All these citation are prior to Fields v Wilbur 2004
They also showed that the date of last payment was 1/17/01, thus outside SOL for California.
In my new response I asked "If that was true, what would stop a less than reputable debt collector from claiming someone owes them $1,000,000."
send them a letter citing the -whole- of Chaudry v Gallerizzo th
send them a letter citing the -whole- of Chaudry v Gallerizzo they are quoting, including the parts that collectors love to forget about. That is so blatantly wrong, they have nothing and that response only proves it.
Here is a FTC staff opinion on proper validation: http://www.ftc
Here is a FTC staff opinion on proper validation:
http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fdcpa/letters/wollman.htm
You can also look at the sample debt validation letter in my signature, it will tell you some things you can request.
Make sure in your letter you did not confuse verification for va
Make sure in your letter you did not confuse verification for validation. Two different things.
I would only like to offer here that validation is the main thin
I would only like to offer here that validation is the main thing that matters and good luck to you!!!!
I used one of the templates found here and i repeatedly told the
I used one of the templates found here and i repeatedly told them I wanted them to "VALIDATE", they used the word Verification.
FYI
OK, now I have a question.
FYI, what exactly is the difference between verification and validation? I though I understood, but now I'm not so sure.
Maybe I'm not the only one confused and feel this might be a good opportunity for clarification.
Can you help?
A verification is what the CRA does when you dispute the debt, b
A verification is what the CRA does when you dispute the debt, basically they just take the word of the CA that it is your debt.
Validation is very different, when you DV the CA the CA has to prove the debt is yours (contract ETC)and they must prove they have the right to collect the debt.
I'm sure someone will be along shortly with a better definition, theres a lot more to it than what I posted.
A verification of a debt would be a letter informing you of the
A verification of a debt would be a letter informing you of the amount and the creditor, possibly also the last payment date or termination date. It's almost like a first notification letter but with a tad more information.
A validation of a debt is when a collection agency has to answer very specific questions as well as provide proof of the debt. You can ask for things like if they are legal to collect in your state, for proof of such debt, how they came to the amount.... ect..
HI FYI If Iam not wrong is verification letter the first noti
HI FYI
If Iam not wrong is verification letter the first notice that a CA sends with in five days of its first contact with the consumer. Iam confused again :?
Nelly
Clears It Up
Ok, thanks for the definitions. I thought I was confused about the difference; however, turns out I had it right. Hopefully, I helped anyone else that might have been confused by asking this question.
Now my next question is, how can a CRA legally send you a letter just telling you what the CA tells them as being correct. It seems to me, since they are the ones reporting the information (and making money by doing so), they should have a responsibility to make sure the information they report is correct. This would entail having the validate the debt with the CA. I'm sure the argument could be made they are just reporting the information provided to them and it is the responsibility of the CA to make sure they report correct information to the CRA; however, we all know not every CA is above the board and might resort to reporting incorrect information. If a newspaper reports a story, they have a responsibility to make sure the information they print is correct, why should a CRA be held to a lesser standard?
YOU ARE RIGHT RON. portfolio recovery associates ONLY CARES ABO
YOU ARE RIGHT RON.
portfolio recovery associates ONLY CARES ABOUT MONEY.
ONE TIME THEY SEND ME A LETTER HERE ABOUT THE"SOL"
EITHER IN AN ACCOUNT FROM 1991 THAT I HAD PAID IN 2005?
I DO NOT USE CHECKS AND MY NAME IS NOT JOHN.
CELLULAR BE AWARE OF PORTFOLIO RECOVERY ASSOCIATES
BECAUSE IS VERY DIFFICULT FOR THEM VALIDATE A DEBT
THAT IS NOT LEGAL.
