How Is This Legal? Please Help
Date: Thu, 10/23/2008 - 17:42
Now its past 30 days and i get a bill from a Enterprise Recovery Systems out of Illinois. And only a bill nothing i asked for including previous payments, fees, interest rates. nothing. I do not believe this could possibly be legal. These companies are charging and collecting anything they want with zero record keeping.
anyone know how this is legit?
I would have to say they probably do have record keeping ~ They
I would have to say they probably do have record keeping ~ They just aren't very willing to share it lol
I'm not quite sure what the specifics are about DV letters and how long the companies have to reply...but I would say that if you didn't get the information you asked for...it's time to hound them.
I agree I believe that they have 30 days to respond...but I coul
I agree I believe that they have 30 days to respond...but I could be wrong
A Collection Agency has no time limit to respond to a DV request
A Collection Agency has no time limit to respond to a DV request (unless you live in TX). If your DV is timely (w/in 30 days of receipt of the initial dunning letter), then collection efforts must cease until validation is provided. If your DV is untimely, then they still never have to provide validation and they can continue collection efforts.
I'm not so sure about that NASCAR_Devil. The attorney that he
I'm not so sure about that NASCAR_Devil.
The attorney that helped me last year, when I was being sued, advised me that CA's do have 30 days to respond to DV letters. She seemed pretty certain of that, so I didn't argue with her. I live in Florida, and I can't find anything in the statutes that gives a time limit; obviously Texas does though, as you said.
The only reason I do bring this up is because it does not state anywhere in the fdcpa a time limit for any CA to respond to a DV letter, so I'm sure many different people interpret it differently. I usually give them a 30-day limit in any DV letter I send, then follow up with them after 30 days advising they have not responded to my original request. I even advise in that follow up letter whether or not they have even acknowledged my request, as I have had only one CA send me a letter, after receiving my DV letter, advising they had received it and would be sending the information I requested.
Funny thing that, they did send another letter advising they didn't have the information and would be ceasing collection efforts. I'm holding onto that one in case they pop up on my credit report at some point or another.
Obviously, yet another reason why the FDCPA should be looked at again by lawmakers. Why should we have a 30-day window in which to dispute with the CA's; however, they have unlimited time to actually validate?
That's what sucks about the fdcpa. The only time constraint tha
That's what sucks about the fdcpa. The only time constraint that is put on a CA is the dunning letter within 5 days of initial contact. Other than that, they have no other time limit in regards to validation unless your state has a statute like the TX Finance Code. Even then, the TFC doesn't really have a lot of teeth:
It's in the CA's own best interest to validate the debt so they can resume collection efforts legally but again, with such a narrow definition of what constitutes validation, they still don't want to for some reason.
Well, I can name a few CA's that don't even send out the require
Well, I can name a few CA's that don't even send out the required dunning letter. Ever. Not just within the 5 day period.
So why should they even worry about responding to validation? Most of them just continue to keep attempting to collect regardless.
Why should they follow a pesky little law like the fdcpa, when the most they would have to pay for violating it is $1,000? It's just the cost of doing business.
Heck, I just got an initial dunning letter this week that doesn't even mention my right to dispute the debt. I've already filed complaints about this with the FTC and Florida's Attorney General's Office.
Some CA's just like to push and see what they can get away with.
ANd what sucks even more is they don't have to prove that they s
ANd what sucks even more is they don't have to prove that they sent out the initial dunning letter. They only have to prove that they have a system in place for hanling that function......grrrrrrrrrrrr! :evil:
yeah, but on the flip side, can I just prove that I had a system
yeah, but on the flip side, can I just prove that I had a system in place to send out that DV letter? Not prove that I even sent it?
I should say not. I'd need that green signature card that proved the CA signed for it.
I better stop, my blood pressure's going up.
That's why whenever I receive anyhting from a CA, I date stamp i
That's why whenever I receive anyhting from a CA, I date stamp it with an electric date stamp, staple the envelope with the postmark on it and file it. I too have a documented method of receiving such letters...... :twisted:
Ooooh, good idea! Where'd you get the electric date stamper?
Ooooh, good idea!
Where'd you get the electric date stamper? Office Depot, Staples, or somewhere along those lines?
Now that was easy.