validation notice

That's what I would do, send a follow up validation letter such as THIS. :)

They were not allowed to send me any more communication without sending what I requested- a copy of the signed original contract-am I correct? All they sent was a letter showing the client, account number, date and amount owed. Basically the same thing they sent originally. They said if I requested a a detailed stament they have ordered it and it will be coming.

This is what I came up with, with the letter that you gave as an example

Your name
Your street address
Your city


Date:

RE: account number

Dear Sir/Madam,

I had sent you a request to validate my debt, account no.............................. I have confirmation
that you received the request on July 2, 2008.

According to the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act (fdcpa), I have the right to claim a validation of
the debt and you are obliged to provide me the relevant documentation. I have not received the
documentation as requested; a copy of the signed original contract showing I have an obligation to pay
you.

You have sent me letters requesting payment while not providing debt validation. A detailed statement is
not proof of my obligation to pay you. You are now in violation of the FDCPA and subject to a fine of $1,000
(refer to the act for updated value), which I may collect by filing a claim. I intend to continue with the
suit if I don"t hear back from you within the coming 15 days.

This might result in a bad mark on your reputation. This might even result in serious legal trouble with
the FTC and other state and federal agencies.


PLEASE TAKE NOTE OF THIS.


Your Signature,
Your Name


Does this sound ok?

All collection efforts are suppose to cease until validation has been met, could be in their minds the documentation they provided was sufficient, that's why I would follow up with a second validation letter to let them know validation hasn't been met. If you keep checking back periodically someone with more knowledge in this area will be around to advise you. :)

Even if she "made" the debt it's still wise for her to exercise her rights as a debtor and request validation, I would hate to see her make payment arrangements with a collection agency, make those payments and pay the debt off, only to learn later this CA didn't have the right to collect on it to begin with. Consequently, she turns around and gets sued by either the OC or another CA that DOES own or is assigned to the debt. ALWAYS insist on proof that a CA either owns or is assigned to a debt they are attempting to collect on, that's common sense IMO.

I dont think my quick reply worked so im sending another one.... :) This debt is from 2000 & 2001. We never received anything but the original bills. I thought these were written off as we qualified for that to be the case. (self employed with no ins. family of 6 on a 30,000 yr income.) we're not talking hundreds here- it's approx $12,000 from an emergency surgery. This PARC bought up all the old med bills from our local hospital- they just built a new one- and everyone in this town is getting letters from them- my aunt got one for 39cents!!!) If Im not mistaken it sure sounds like we have a debt collector posting here since everone else KNOWS it's our right to validate debt. If they have copies of our signed papers then we'll take it from there, but I see an attorney and bankruptcy in my future if that's the case cuz we're barely keeping above water. We're current on everything but I also know these people wont take 25 or 50 a month on a 12,000 debt so we'll go down fast if garnishment happens. Thanks fro the replies

the debt is older than 7 years... .its charged off and will come off your credit report.

Just becausea debt has been charged off and no longer reporting does not extinguish the debt. They own it, you owe it. If this is beyond your states SOL then there is no legal obligation to pay but an unpaid debt just doesn't go away. If you are beyond SOL, trhen send a full cease comm, they can contact you once more after receiveing it. They will likely sell it to anohter debt buyer. Rinse and repeat.

These bills were NEVER on our credit report- that is why I thought they were written off through financial assistance. I spoke to someone in billing for the hospital-(not the CA) these old accounts are not accessible by the new hospital billing. She could get into the old accounts and tell me what notes were in there from back then etc. I questioned whether his signed original docs were even available and she said theres a possibility they arent if the system was purged....I asked about getting these back form the debt buyer and she said she couldnt- I asked who could and she said try hospital administration SO a letter is being sent to them today. In the meantime I am requesting DV AGAIN since they didnt provide me with my request in the first place

Sounds like they sold it off and are now out of the picture. You'll have to deal with the CA(JDB) on this now.

They did sell all their old accounts. The new hospital has a new billing system that cant access the older accounts. They have a billing company that does have access to the old accounts and that is who i was directed to. SHe could pull up the bills and so on but not signed docs etc. Should I still DV the CA with a second letter all they sent me was the name of the debtor , date, amount due- basically what they sent me when they first when they 1st contacted me. I requested copies of signed docs showing I had an obligation to pay them, etc.

They don't have to provide a whole lot of other info to you outside the discovery phase of litigation. What they sent you meets the bare requirements of the fdcpa. You can send a 2nd DV but they don't have to respond with anything else.

From what I've read, debt validation is just that.. they have to prove that they have the right to collect on the debt/ that the debt is valid..... On this site I've read that sending me a detailed statement is not DV, when I've asked for proof of signed documents obligating me to this debt (basic contract law as I've seen it called). So, if they actually took me to court , are you saying that is when they would have to show this? I thought they could not continue collection proceeding if they did not validate with what was requested....Im very confused now :?

Was your DV timely? W/in 30 days of the initial dunning letter? If your DV was timely then collection efforts must cease until validation is provided but they never have to respond. If your DV was un-timely, then they do not have to cease collection efforts or provide validation. Rmember, validation is very narrowly defined by the fdcpa. Read Sec 809.

It was filed timely and they signed for it well under the 30 day time frame(on july 2). I used a DV letter from this site and asked for competent evidence bearing my signature, showing that I have a contractual obligation to pay them. The other day I received a letter(s) (as it was for 2 accounts) from them with VALIDATION NOTICE typed at the top. It showed the service provider, date and amount owed. It stated that if I requested a detailed statement, it has been ordered from the OC. That is it.... no signed documents or anything else, other than telling me to contact them to make payment. This is where I get confused- they sent me a seperate statement with both accounts on it the same day, with the 30 day to dipute this debt etc etc notice on it. Isnt this in violation ? Thanks for taking the time to respond :)

This is interesting and in fact I was suggested that I use the Fields v. Wilber case in one of my pending cases.
http://www.debtconsolidationcare.com/collection-agencies/debt-validation.html
LawStudent wrote:

Since the debt is outside the SOL and outside the CRA reporting time limit I would just send them a letter stating the failed to provide proper validation, the debt is time barred and the debt is outside the CRA reporting time limit attached to a full cease comm letter. Either they will respect your full cease comm letter and not bother you again or they risk getting sued by you. More than likely they will just sell the debt like was suggested above.

OFF TOPIC POST DELETED

Quote: