Law firm/Collection agency filed summons after I sent letter of validation

Well, technically, they are supposed to stop all collection activity (per FDCPA) once they receive a request for validation. Since they instead sued you, that could be perceived as further collection activity which could be construed as a violation of FDCPA.

So would I send a second letter of validation saying they are in violation and file suit against them?
Do I still need to file a reply to their summons or face judgement?

Any suggestions of recommended next steps would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

kdestef

Has the summons actually been filed with the court? Check with the clerk. If so, you definitely need to respond to it. You can ask for validation of the debt, how they arrived at the amounts they're asking for and vailidation of their ability to collect during the discovery process. You might consider a countersuit since you weren't afforded the opportunity to have the debt validated during the 30 days, which is your right.

Hi OhioGal,
It has been filed. I sent my DV March 7th, I received my return receipt card back showing they received my DV March 8th. I called the courts on the March 21st and found out they filed it on March 16th, 8 days after they received the DV. I plan to respond. I looked on the NACA website and found an attorney in my area. I emailed them but have received no response so I plan to call them today. I'll see if they recommend a countersuit, they definitely DID NOT provide me documentation validating it. Thanks!

kdestefa

The FDCPA contains an exception for legal action, so the fact that they've actually sued you renders your validation request pointless. You could try to fight them on it, but I doubt it would work unless your state has stricter rules than the FDCPA (some states do).
What are you planning on filing a counter-claim for, exactly?

Where exactly does the FDCPA show an exception for legal action?

it doesn't ohiogal.this guy started a thread about working for a collector in FL.i suspected he worked for a bottomfeeder.now i know it as not only is midland one of the biggest bottomfeeders out there as they always collect on debt past SOL.btw the fact that midland does this with regularity is the reason to dispute the debt.bottomline the OP should file a discovery motion asap.meaning they get the validation they seek.i would bet midland one of the dirtiest JDB'S can't prove their case.to close their is no provision in THE FDCPA that states that a lawsuit can be filed in direct response to a DV letter.now if the debt is validated and the person still doesn't pay then yes suit can be filed,but not in direct rsponse to a DV.i suggest destynova get back to the phones of their bottomfeeder.

Yes, however, I asked for validation prior to them suing me so I'd like to know exactly where this "exception" is because I'm looking at the FDCPA right now and I don't see any "exceptions" as you claim. Hmmm...

Additionally, I have sent a DV after I've been sued and still won the case. Just because you JDC's sue a consumer, it doesn't mean you don't have to still PROVE that you own the debt or have the right to collect on the debt. As in my case about 4 months ago when I beat a JDC in court because they showed generic proof that they owned the debt; iow, it wasnt' specific to my account.

The above thread is intended for DestyNova. Thanks to Ohiogal and paulmergel who also questioned this forum users motive for making such claims.

i know they are trying to spread misinformation delibrately in my opinion.btw you say this happened before with another JDB.then proceed like that again as midland more than likely has no leg to stand on.that is why they filed suit.beat them in court as well.