Violation?

There is no such thing a limited cease and desist...it is all or nothing.

There is also a provision that allows them one final contact to tell you they are furthering action or ceasing action. Go back and read the FDCPA.

I did say in my post that the FDCPA was ambiguous on that point.

Maybe I should have asked my question as; Does anyone have any experience in challenging a CA on placing a phone call after sending a letter saying only contact must be in writing.

And Soaplady, I have read a lot of your responses to questions on this board and you always say the same thing, but never seem to be helpful to anyone. I agree with you about the limited cease and desist. I think I was considering their telephone contact could be considered a continuation of collection activity, prior to their response to my request for validation and verification of the debt. And while yes, as you wrote, "There is also a provision that allows them one final contact to tell you they are furthering action or ceasing action,:" if they do that prior to responding to my request, wouldn't that still be a continuation of collection activity?


15 USC 1692g[FONT=Univers Condensed,Univers Condensed][SIZE=2]12 ?? 809 15 USC 1692g [/SIZE][/FONT]
(b) If the consumer notifies the debt collector in writing within [FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][SIZE=3]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 credi[/SIZE][/FONT][SIZE=3][SIZE=3]tor, the debt collector shall cease collection of the debt, or any disputed portion thereof, until the debt collector [/SIZE][/SIZE][FONT=Times New Roman]obtains verification of the debt or any copy of a judgment, [SIZE=3]or the name and address of the original creditor, and a copy [/SIZE]of such verification or judgment, or name and address of [SIZE=3]the original creditor, is mailed to the consumer by the debt collector. Collection activities and communications that do not otherwise violate this title may continue during the 30-day period referred to in subsection (a) unless the [/SIZE]consumer has notified the debt collector in writing that the [/FONT][SIZE=3][SIZE=3]debt, or any portion of the debt, is disputed or that the consumer requests the name and address of the original creditor. Any collection activities and communication during the 30-day period may not overshadow or be inconsistent with the disclosure of the consumer???s right to dispute the debt or request the name and address of the original creditor.[/SIZE][/SIZE]

[SIZE=3]So, I thank you for pointing out the error in my original question. My question should have been, if you sent the notification to the CA, they received it, never mailed you anything, and contacted you by telephone on the exact 30th day after they signed for the request, saying, hey, please return my call, we need to make arrangements to pay this debt, wouldn't that be a continuation of collection activity? I see it clearer now. Thank you for making ME go back and read the FDCPA.
[/SIZE]

Well they should never be leaving a message on a voice mail stating anything else but their name and phone number....there should be no discussion or mention of a debt ...that would be a major violation.

There is no possible definite answer based on what you have given us. It reall depends on the voicemail you were left with. Did they call and mention anything about you owing a debt, or trying to discuss paying it? If they just said "this is _____ from ___, please return my call at ______, thank you", then no, they have not broken the law. There needs to be a clear collection effort in the call in order to be a violation.

Also, you may be confused on the 30 day rule. That rule is for us, not for the debt collector. There is only one state that requires that validation be provided within 30 days of request, and that is Texas. The 30 days in the FDCPA is the amount of time you have, starting with the first time they contact you abotu the debt, in which to dispute it.

I beg to differ with the statement that there is no such thing as a limited cease communications letter. The FTC has specifically addressed this issue, and stated that while FDCPA 805(c) expressly gives one the right to require cessation of all communications with the consumer, it also permits lesser restrictions, such as written communications only. Since the consumer is the one requesting the bar, they are not the one restricted to an all or nothing.

However, in this case, a cease communication bar appears to separately be in place based on the sending of a DV request. If the DV request was timely, it sets its own, and total, cease communication bar outside of any other letter sent under section 805(c), until such time as validation is provided, making any provisions in an 805(c) letter redundant until such time as validation has been provided under FDCPA 809(b). I would regard any communication from a debt collector to be with regard to "collection of a debt." It most certainly is not about yesterday's baseball game. FDCPA 809(b) bars any communication related to their collection of the debt, and does not differentiate between permissible and non-permissible collection activities.