Validation Clarification
Date: Wed, 04/04/2007 - 14:15
[quote]Monsewicz v. Unterberg and Assocs., P.C., 2005 WL 756433 (S.D. Ind Jan. 25, 2005). The FDCPA does not require a debt collector to provide the original, a certified, or an attested copy of the document creating the debt when providing the consumer verification of the debt. Instead, verification involves nothing more then the debt collector confirming in writing that the amount being demanded is what the creditor is claiming is owed.
The following is the validation except from the FDCPA:
§ 809. Validation of debts [15 USC 1692g]
(a) Within five days after the initial communication with a consumer in connection with the collection of any debt, a debt collector shall, unless the following information is contained in the initial communication or the consumer has paid the debt, send the consumer a written notice containing --
(1) the amount of the debt;
(2) the name of the creditor to whom the debt is owed;
(3) a statement that unless the consumer, within thirty days after receipt of the notice, disputes the validity of the debt, or any portion thereof, the debt will be assumed to be valid by the debt collector;
(4) a statement that if the consumer notifies the debt collector in writing within the thirty-day period that the debt, or any portion thereof, is disputed, the debt collector will obtain verification of the debt or a copy of a judgment against the consumer and a copy of such verification or judgment will be mailed to the consumer by the debt collector; and
(5) a statement that, upon the consumer's written request within the thirty-day period, the debt collector will provide the consumer with the name and address of the original creditor, if different from the current creditor.
(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.
(c) The failure of a consumer to dispute the validity of a debt under this section may not be construed by any court as an admission of liability by the consumer.
In certain circumstances additional documentation is required but that is usually concerning a different issue. And there is even court rulings that in certain instances that it may be necessary to ask the consumer to provide additional information (documentation) in order to verify the validy of the debt.
Also Note that the FDCPA does not specify the amount of time a debt collector has to provide verification of the debt to the consumer. However, until the verification is provided, the debt collector is prohibited from pursuing any colletion activity on that account.
Also note the following:
Luxenburg v. Equifax Credit Info. Servs., 2005 WL 78947 (N.D. III> Jan 15, 2005). A debt collector who receives a request for verification may provide validation and continue its collection activities or cease its collection activities. Reporting a debt before the debt collector receives a request for verification is not "collection activity" proscribed by section 809(b).
[/quote]
Note the concerning the Luxenburg case there are some State laws that require notification that an account will be reported to the CRAs.
Please adjust the validation part of your website. I have seen some good stuff here but the validation portion is misleading and in the in some cases can cause more damage to someone reading this.
Thank you,
Daar
I don't know who you are but I have some material that defines v
I don't know who you are but I have some material that defines validation vs verification. I would need to look up some my own caselaw to debate this subject.
Quote:In certain circumstances additional documentation is requi
Quote:
In certain circumstances additional documentation is required but that is usually concerning a different issue. |
Chew on this for starters: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL TR
Chew on this for starters:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20580
Division of Credit Practices
Bureau of Consumer Protection
March 10, 1993
Jeffrey S. Wollman
Vice President and Controller
Retrieval Masters Creditors Bureau, Inc.
1261 Broadway
New York, New York 10001
Dear Mr. Wollman:
This is in response to your letter of February 9, 1993 to David Medine regarding the type of
verification required by Section 809(b) of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. You ask
whether a collection agency for a medical provider will fulfill the requirements of that
Section if it produces "an itemized statement of services rendered to a patient on its own
computer from information provided by the medical institution . . .??????? in response to a request
for verification of the debt. You also ask who is responsible for mailing the verification to
the consumer.
The statute requires that the debt collector obtain verification of the debt and mail it to the
consumer (emphasis mine). Because one of the principal purposes of this Section is to help
consumers who have been misidentified by the debt collector or who dispute the amount of
the debt, it is important that the verification of the identity of the consumer and the amount
of the debt be obtained directly from the creditor. Mere itemization of what the debt
collector already has does not accomplish this purpose. As stated above, the statute requires
the debt collector, not the creditor, to mail the verification to the consumer.
Your interest in writing is appreciated. Please be aware that since this is only the opinion of
Commission staff, the Commission itself is not bound by it.
Sincerely,
John F. LeFevre
Attorney
Division of Credit Practices
Before you cry about it not being caselaw,I know that.
As I said a lot of the information on this site is useful and in
As I said a lot of the information on this site is useful and insightful.
I just dealt with a consumer 3 months ago who based on what he read on this site lost $7,000 in building fees on the house that he was having built because of the validation portion of this website. There is no set time to provide verification on an alleged debt. The consumer received validation as prescribed by the fdcpa, and he felt it was not enough information to validate the debt. FDCPA puts the burden of proof on the debt collector in section 809 of the FDCPA. Show me case law or court opinions to the contrary. There are certain instances where additional documentation is "demanded" and "required" but that is NOT in the scope of the FDCPA concerning validation and verification.
I did not post this to create havoc. I posted this due to the situation that I was recently involved in. The consumer that was referenced above did not only lose the home he was having built but also now has a Judgment against him. The consumer recently contacted me to try to work something out and explained the events that lead to his current position. In the end the consumer had to forfeit his home because he could not afford the additional interest that would was to be added to his mortgage.
I say again there is a lot of good information on this site however the information on this site created the above unfortunate events. So do what you will with the post. I am not here to argue or defend.
I am simply showing you that a consumer is not required to submi
I am simply showing you that a consumer is not required to submit any documents or release any of his personal info to some collector that he knows next to nothing about.If he lost in court then either an error happened or he lost on merit.he could have used discovery to receive and attack their evidence before going to trial.All I am doing here is making sure our people don't get lost reading this post.Any info received here users are cautioned to use at their discretion. I am not a lawyer,just a concerned consumer trying to help the less fortunate.
While there is a lot of good information on this site, users mus
While there is a lot of good information on this site, users must know that this is a public site, and anyone can post anything. No one here claims to be an expert on anything. Anyones using the advice on this site should use their best judgement and check out the points of law before using the information. That's just common sense.
I just dealt with a consumer 3 months ago who based on what he r
I just dealt with a consumer 3 months ago who based on what he read on this site lost $7,000 in building fees on the house that he was having built because of the validation portion of this website.
That is a shame that this happened. There may have been more to this case than what you have stated. Just providing a statement that only has a creditors name and the amount of the alleged debt is NOT validation.
The CA will have to provide more evidence than that in a court of law especially if the alleged debt is not on ones credit report.
That is a shame that this happened. There may have been more to this case than what you have stated. Just providing a statement that only has a creditors name and the amount of the alleged debt is NOT validation.
The CA will have to provide more evidence than that in a court of law especially if the alleged debt is not on ones credit report.
Too bad this person????????s debt was not time barred. I am curious if you actually feel proud about what you done in destroying a family????????s dream of a new home.
I guess you now have bragging rights in???????Bottom Dwellers??????? hall of fame for destroying someone????????s dream. Did you sleep well after doing this? Just curious ..
The customer should have definitely taken the legal advice from
The customer should have definitely taken the legal advice from an attorney. This is a message board with opinions from large number of people. Few attorneys also come on this board. I guess, no one and this website is not to be held responsible for the content provided by any one.
Point number 5 mentioned in the TOS clears it all. http://www
Point number 5 mentioned in the TOS clears it all.
http://www.debtconsolidationcare.com/tos.html
Cajun is right. The key word in the summary you posted is "veri
Cajun is right. The key word in the summary you posted is "verification". "Validation" is quite different. As with thos boggus affidavits which some send out, they only "verify" that they have your address and the amount of the alleged debt. No proof that you are obligated to the CA or that they have the right to collect it.
You know if the op would tell the whole story,it might help us o
You know if the op would tell the whole story,it might help us out here.I am gonna give yall a link to it but basically person tried to fight an attorney on fdcpa after losing home to a foreclosure action.It is true he started with a verification.Before court he proceeded to bury them in paper from the mortgage company more than qualifying as validation and also as court evidence.
207.41.16.152/opinions/AMA620O1.PDF
Place http colon and two forward slashes in front of the address to activate it. It is a unpublished decision in Indiana. I still don't know why the person did not cite the caselaw Spears vs Brennan. It is state law but very conclusive for that state.
Most debt buyers seem to try to blur the terms "verification" an
Most debt buyers seem to try to blur the terms "verification" and "validation". I found this summary: Fields v. Wilber Law Firm, Donald L. Wilber and Kenneth Wilber, USCA-02-C-0072, 7th Circuit Court, Sept 2004 on another site. The court sided with Fields. The collection lawyer inflated the debt, and the dunning letters were not so that an "unsophisticated" consumer would understand. It also says that validation is how the fees and interest were calculated and how much did the collector add on to the fees and how were they determined. Also, a contractual relationship must exist between debtor and creditor.
Law Student
San Francisco, California -streetcars, the Golden Gate, and $4.50 per gallon gasoline
