Issues with Debt Validation (Long Post!)
Date: Tue, 04/29/2008 - 11:53
I've posted on here before, took the (good!) advice offered and thought I was done, but alas. The drama continues with Credigy. The background: (takes place in California) (and I apologize in advance - this post turned out to be MUCH longer than I had planned)
Back in Jan 2005 I received a collection notice from a law office attempting to collect on behalf of Credigy. They said I owed $4,795 for an old MBNA account. I responded saying I had no record of such a debt and asked them to forward validation. A month later they responded saying they were no longer representing Credigy & were closing their file. Cool.
In April 2005 I received a collection attempt from Credigy for $5,163. Confused, I pulled up my Transunion credit report for the first time. The report showed an MBNA balance of $2,885, date opened of 3/1994 and date closed of 12/2001. Credigy's referenced account number didn't match the report's MBNA account number - and I had no recollection of such a debt; so I sent a letter requesting validation. No response - I figured they had closed their file. Not.
Fast forward 2 years later: June 2007 I get another collection attempt from Credigy for $7,490, this time with an account number that matched the credit report (what a coincidence - from a recent Transunion report I saw that Credigy did a credit query on me in 4/2007).
To summarize, I've been disputing their claim of debt for about a year now - about every other month they'll respond to my request for validation with a plain piece of paper showing the account #, original creditor, original balance ($2,885) assignee (First Select, acquired in Jan, 2002) and current owner (Credigy, acquired Dec, 02). I'll respond saying this isn't nearly sufficient and the person I've been corresponding with will send me another one.
With each of my letters my tone has been getting firmer about what would constitute proper validation - my latest included a copy of the FTC staff opinion letter (to Mr. Wollman).
So this is where I currently stand. The latest letter from Credigy is signed by a VP instead of the usual guy (scare tactic?) and I currently "owe" $8,829.
He's attached the latest "Account Verification Statement" and writes: "You claim that proper verification of the debt has not been provided; however, 'verification of a debt involves nothing more than the debt collector confirming in writing that the amount being demanded is what the creditor is claiming is owed.' (Chaudhry v. Gallerizzo, 174 F.3d 394 (4th Cir. 1999); Clark v. Capital Credit & Collection Servs., Inc. 2006 WL 2441705, *5-11 (9th Cir. Aug. 24, 2006) (adopting the Chaudhry v. Gallerizzo rationale))
You stated that we failed to validate the debt, however our records indicate that a validation letter was sent to you on or about February 1, 2005. Per state law, we are not required to hold a license to collect in the state of CA."
I'm at my wit's end - the last thing I want to do is take this court...and I don't know what to do - I know nothing about law and wouldn't even know where to start researching for a counter to his citings.
I pulled my Transunion credit report today to double check and the MBNA item has fallen completely off. Wouldn't this suggest the statute of limitation has expired? Can they still try to collect this aggresively if that's the case? Any comments/suggestions/advice?
I would *greatly* appreciate any help!!
--I'm at my wit's end - the last thing I want to do is take this
--I'm at my wit's end - the last thing I want to do is take this court...and I don't know what to do --
Let me help you out. How about sending a check to the collector as you know you owe this debt.
reply
if you are sure it is past the SOL,and if they attempt to get a judgement.use the SOL as your defense.
Johnny, Statute of Limitation in California is 4 years from
Johnny,
Statute of Limitation in California is 4 years from date of last payment. So if this is dated from late 2001 it is well out of SOL (unless you made a payment to someone in regards to this debt).
In regards to Chaudhry v. Gallerizzo, 174 F.3d 394 (4th Cir. 1999)that deals with the request for second validation AFTER proper and legal validation was received.
Send them a letter once again stating that the SOL has expire and unless they want to provide you with proper and legal validation they are NOT to contact you again in regards to this matter.
Disregard NNC, he believes that anytime a collector calls you should pay what ever they say and that they don't have to prove anything.
hi Johnny-- cellular is right--this is way past the SOL. The
hi Johnny--
cellular is right--this is way past the SOL. There are a couple ways you could handle this.
First, you can send them a total dease and desist letter, in which you tell them that they are to immediately stop all contact with you regarding this debt. If you send this letter, I would also state in there that the statute of limitations on this debt has expired, a fact they no doubt know already. Normally, I would not recommend this, but since you are obviously being fed some kind of crap(two different account numbers, etc etc) and they refuse to properly validate the debt, then in this case this would be a good way to go.
Or, you could sue them. According to federal law(the fdcpa), they have continued collection activity without providing proper validation of the debt. That can mean up to $1000 in your pocket, plus court costs. This would also be a good option in my opinion because they will obviously not pay any attention to more DV demands, no matter what you send them. They know the law--they know that proper validation cannot be something typed on their own letterhead, but that it must come in writing from the original creditor. On that point alone, they have never sent you proper validation. The full intent of the law with regards to validation is so that consumers will be protected from any company simply saying "hey, you owe me this money"--it forces them to provide proof that the debt even legitimately exists, and I dont think that you would have any problem showing in court how their own internal paperwork is not sufficient validation.
Whatever you do, be sure to send any further correspondence by certified mail, return receipt, so you can prove they got your letter. But seriously, I wouldnt waste any more time on these bozos. Even the amount seems suspicious to me--between January and April 2005, that's three months--the total amount they claimed you owed went up by nearly 8%....somehow I dont think that your state allows 32% interest annually. I could be wrong, but that seems awfully high to me.
Thank you both for the quick & helpful replies...I definitely fe
Thank you both for the quick & helpful replies...I definitely feel much better about them citing the whole case law thing.
I'll be sending a cease & desist letter this week. Will post more if anything else develops...
Thanks again for your help - it's REALLY appreciated! :)
Whoops...I meant thanks to all three of you! Subtracted one too
Whoops...I meant thanks to all three of you! Subtracted one too many when excluding the messed-up one :p