validation

who is it from? i recieved similar validation from nelson watson and was advised here it was proper validation. i still am unsure if it was enough info but it showed me the debt was truely mine and i than settled.

thanks for the information it is form Creditors Interchange they are licensed in my state. What kind of settlement can I expect?

that i do not know, if you feel this is enough validation (if they are licensed, i would) i would call or put in writing if you are more comfortable and explain that you would like to work something out.

PEOPLE! Credit card statements ARE NOT proper validation. Quit settling for that. Until folks start standing up to these people, they will continue breaking the law. Send them back a thanks but no thanks letter, this does nothing to validate the debt except show they have a debt in your name. Verification and validation are worlds different.

Here is the law as it is written. Section 809 5B. It requires verification under the validation section. It clearly says verification. Please read!
(b) If the consumer notifies the debt collector in writing within the thirty-day period described in subsection (a) that the debt, or any portion thereof, is disputed, or that the consumer requests the name and address of the original creditor, the debt collector shall cease collection of the debt, or any disputed portion thereof, until the debt collector obtains verification of the debt or any copy of a judgment, or the name and address of the original creditor, and a copy of such verification or judgment, or name and address of the original creditor, is mailed to the consumer by the debt collector.

That is all they need to provide. You can request a lot more but they do not, under the law have to provide anything but proof that you owe the money. Credit card bills are NOT proof you owe the money. They are proof that you did at one time owe the money but you may not anymore.

all they have to show is they have something with your name, dob, ssn and maybe address, that is verification that they can collect but it is not validation. Anyone can get your name, DOB, SSN and address and then say they have verification ont he debt. Verification does not validate the debt. It is only hand signed contracts that validate debt and that by itself isn't validation either. There are many judicial opinions on the matter and most don't just reference charge card statements or just signed contracts. There needs to be much more to it than just charge statements which is what the original poster was asking.

Personally I think it is a little of both. If the statements completely match what they say you owe, then asking for a contract is just being picky...in this case I would consider it validation (especially if it is within statute). BUT if they claiming you owe more then the statement records, or if the date of the statement is questionable (meaning there may be more up to date statements or it is a statement or set of statements showing somewhere in the middle of the debt) then you would not be unreasonable to demand more proof.

PLEASE! I put the law up there as it is written. If you think it is open to interpretation fine. It ls pretty clear what it says. "until the debt collector obtains verification of the debt or any copy of a judgment, or the name and address of the original creditor, and a copy of such verification or judgment, or name and address of the original creditor, is mailed to the consumer by the debt collector. "
It is what it says. I do not want to stand up for the CA but it is pretty cut and dried to me! I have sent several debt validation letters and demanded much more but what I am saying is the law does not require it!

I know..I was just saying what my own personal view is on it. The law needs to be more clear, but I get around that part by telling CAs they might as well give me what I ask for since if they take me to court I will get it there and countersue them for anything I can manage to as well. Most of the time that seems to give them pause...but then maybe that is because I am only getting hounded for debt that it either not mine, so old I think it was done when I was 17, or they are charging me a crazy amount above what it should be.

If an account had been paid years ago but is reporting on the credit report as newer than the original creditor. What should I do? When MCM is involved its really never good..Can use debt validate? both oc and mcm refused to give me any info about account..also, mcm did an account review inquiry two years after the account was reported paid. do i have any recourse?

Goldenblast I was referring to the posts before you. You posted as I was typing my reply. I went to bed after that. It was much later than I am used to.

Sure, I don't dispute what the law as you posted is saying. What I am saying is that if you, me or we continue to accept "statements" as validation, why would a CA every send anything different. It seems to me that there is back peddling here on this forum about accepting what they send you as validation of the debt when they are merely sending verification. There are other topics here that support my position, I am not the first one to bring this up. Also, I've had experience with getting credit card statements as "proof" of the debt and when I responded to them that credit card statements showed me nothing, the CA ran off like a scared puppy never to be heard from again.

Verification is them just sending you the name of the original creditor and the amount of the debt....thats all...verification=verifying the information. Validation=proving what they verify...there is a difference...and I still think statements are pretty good validation if it all matches up.

i was perfectly happy with my validation of credit card statements. i would have liked to have gotten more but the amounts matched up and i settled, which was reflected on my credit report. everything turned out okay in my case. i think it is validation.