Contacted via mail prior to validating - need advice

is it the same debt? if not then obviously theres no violation there.....

Are you from Georgia? If not then they cannot sue you and cannot threaten to sue you as they are a law firm and not licensed outside of GA.

I would send another DV letter along with a copy of the first one if you have it, along with a copy of the signed returned green card from the post office. Note to them that you have requested validation once before and they are continuing collection activity by not validating and continuing collection.

Note that further collection attempts without validation could result in violations of the FDCPA where you will pursue the matter in Federal Court. Further note that any lawsuit filed against you during this validation period will result in a counter-claim against them for violations under the FDCPA plus punitive damages for pain and suffereing.

While you are waiting go to NACA.net and look for an attorney in your area to sue them if you have to. Also it is good to have the attorney in case they do sue you as most attorneys do not get involved if litigation has started already.

Thank you pokertramp. I live in CA. I was thinking I should send them another dv letter with a copy of my first dv letter and the receipt and since you suggested the same, I will do that.

Good to hear your not in Georgia. The only thing they can do is turn it over to an attorney in CA...That attorney should, by law, send a dunning letter giving you 30 days to dispute.

Here is the kicker, if they do not validate and turn it over to an attorney in CA, you can then sue them or maybe both. It depends on if they mark it as disputed and if the attorney in CA ignores the disputed file.

Oh yeah just so you know. The statute of limitations in CA is 4 years if it is in writing for a open account such as a credit card and if they do not have it in writing, it is 2 years. A written contract, like a cell phone, a car lease,,,,is 4 years also.


What this means is that if a payment has not been made in say 4 years if it was a car lease, then they cannot sue and if they do, you can counter-sue them plus have their claim dismissed with prejudice.

What happens when an account is close or is out of statute is collectors and attorneys get tougher and threaten people more, they know they can't sue so if they threaten someone, they hope to scare you into paying, do not fall for it.

Quote:

Pokertramp - you have been great! Can you do me one last favor and read over the letter I drafted?

"To Whom It May Concern:
This letter follows receipt of your second correspondence to me dated December 14, 2009 and which I received on December 21, 2009 (your first correspondence to me was dated November 10, 2009 and received on November 17, 2009).

As you are well aware, I sent a request to validate the debt you are attempting to collect upon and you received such request on November 30, 2009 (see, enclosed correspondence and copy of signed receipt). According to the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act (FDCPA), I have the right to obtain a validation of the debt you are alleging is mine and you are obligated to provide me with relevant documentation.

You sent a second collection letter attempting to collect this alleged debt, without any validation of said debt, two weeks after receiving my request for validation. Your law firm is not licensed to practice law in the State of California and, therefore, your correspondence to me is an attempt at collection of a debt. I am sure you are aware that your attempts at collection without validating said debt, are in violation of the FDCPA and subject to a fine of $1,000, which I may collect by filing a claim against you.

I am also sure that you are aware that any lawsuit filed against me during this validation period could result in a counter-claim against you for violations under the FDCPA and can also include punitive damages for pain and suffering.

Sincerely, ...."

Do I need to leave anything out or add anything in? Thanks again!!!

I think it's a good letter but I would still pursue a suit against them, I would also file a complaint with the FTC. You may also want to get in touch with Bud Hibbs via email, he may be able help you. Attempting to collect on a debt during the validation period is a clear violation of the FDCPA, and if you have the letter of collection, the green receipt and a copy of the letter of validation this seems like a clear cut case to me. I would pursue it if I were you.

Looks good to me too. Listen to Shazzers too, one of the great helpers on here,,,,pretty sure it's a she I forget,lol.....Do as Shazzers said and file the complaints.

Thank you both - I will be taking all of your advice and I will keep you posted. Love this forum!

Quote:

NASCAR_Devil --- I live in CA. Last time I paid was February or March of this year. Yes, my DV was timely (w/in 30 days of first dunning ltr). If they do not have to prove they are authorized to collect, what exactly do they have to do to "validate" the debt? I have received 2 phone calls since my DV ltr and just yesterday, as I said in my original post, I received another ltr from them basically saying an account with Washington Mutual (Chase Bank) is currently owned by Riverwalk Holdings, Ltd.,; all their efforts at collection to date have been unsuccessful; their client has directed them to evaluate for possible litigation; account has been assigned to Pre-legal/Asset Investigation Dept; please contact if you wish to settle; blah, blah, blah.
To me, that is not a response to my DV letter but is an attempt to collect without validating. Am I wrong?

I do know that it's a very gray area which defines what actually constitutes debt validation but, veryifying that the collector is the legal person to pay the debt to isn't an unreasonable request. I also believe it could be debated in a court of law quite easily.