does FDCPA apply

[gxav]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? PA

A company in TX is sending me letters about a debt that is not mine.

They sent the first letter in April. I sent a cease and desist certified RRR. To which they responded on Aug 4 with a letter saying they are owners of the debt but with no validation of debt. I sent another certified RRR asking them provide validation of debt and to cease and desist if they cannot.

On Aug 20 I received another letter ("2nd reminder") but with no validation. On Sept 4 I got another "Final notice".

My questions are:
1. does the FDCPA apply to companies that claim they are the owners of the debt?
2. If so has there been a statute violation in this case?
3. If I have cause of action do I have to go to TX to file a lawsuit?
4. Can I do this in small claims court?

Any assistance would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks

[JETX]

Originally Posted by gxav

My questions are:
1. does the FDCPA apply to companies that claim they are the owners of the debt?

As long as they are not the ORIGINAL creditors, yes.

2. If so has there been a statute violation in this case?

Based solely on your post, if the claim meets the definition of debt (per the FDPCA), it would appear that they are likely in violation of the FDCPA.

3. If I have cause of action do I have to go to TX to file a lawsuit?

No. You can file in your state.... but then if you get a judgment, you would likely have to pursue their assets in Texas.

4. Can I do this in small claims court?

Yes, but most small claims courts don't know much about the FDCPA and its application.

[gxav]

JetX
Thanks for your response.

One more question:
If for whatever reason they decide to sue me, can they do it in TX? or would it have to be PA.

PA is where I reside.

Thanks again.

[debtcollector`]

Originally Posted by gxav

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? PA

A company in TX is sending me letters about a debt that is not mine.

They sent the first letter in April. I sent a cease and desist certified RRR. To which they responded on Aug 4 with a letter saying they are owners of the debt but with no validation of debt. I sent another certified RRR asking them provide validation of debt and to cease and desist if they cannot.

On Aug 20 I received another letter ("2nd reminder") but with no validation. On Sept 4 I got another "Final notice".

My questions are:
1. does the FDCPA apply to companies that claim they are the owners of the debt?
2. If so has there been a statute violation in this case?
3. If I have cause of action do I have to go to TX to file a lawsuit?
4. Can I do this in small claims court?

Any assistance would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks

With respect to JETX, we can't know whether or not there was a violation with knowing the exact text of the letters. Your second letter rescinded your cease and desist by specifically requesting that they continue contact.

You should discuss this with an attorney. As for filing suit, you can file in small claims but it will be removed to federal court. Again, you will need an attorney.

DC

[tby2000]

The FDCPA absolutely applies to companies which claim they own the debt, especially since you live in PA, which is in the 3rd Circuit.

In a 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals decision in 2007 (FTC v. Checknet Investors, Inc. 502 F.3d 159), the Court opined that "Appellants claim that the FDCPA does not apply
to them because the NSF checks they purchased
were not “debts” within the meaning of the FDCPA. . . The district court held that Check Investors
and Hutchins FN11 are “debt collectors” as
defined by the FDCPA because Check Investors ob-tained the “debts,” i.e., the NSF checks, after they
were in default. . . they are “debt collectors” was error
because they are actually “creditors” FN13 collecting
debts actually owed to them, as opposed
to “debt collectors” collecting obligations owed
to someone else. . .Not only do we conclude
that Appellants are “debt collectors” rather
than “creditors,” we believe that their course of
conduct exemplifies why Congress enacted the FDCPA
and the wisdom of doing so. It also shows
why Congress has directed us to focus on whether a
debt was in default when acquired to determine the
status of “creditor” vs. “debt collector.”

That is binding case law on all 3rd Circuit Courts, and with that, you can't lose.

[Some Random Guy]

Your blanket statement "The FDCPA absolutely applies to companies which claim they own the debt" needs to be changed.

It should be
"Court have runled that the FDCPA applies to companies which claim they own the debt but which are not the original creditors. And for original creditors, they may fall under their state's version of the FDCPA if it exists."

[mdrummer5]

Originally Posted by Some Random Guy

Your blanket statement "The FDCPA absolutely applies to companies which claim they own the debt" needs to be changed.

It should be
"Court have runled that the FDCPA applies to companies which claim they own the debt but which are not the original creditors. And for original creditors, they may fall under their state's version of the FDCPA if it exists."

^ This. I was a collector doing 1st party work for about 5 years. Representing the original creditor I would typically call a debtor after the receipt of a cease and desist and explain that we could and likely would continue to attempt contact. I was threatened by attorney after attorney with lawsuits pertaining to the FDCPA none of which saw the light of day because we were the original creditor.

There are still certain things that an original creditor does have to abide by like harassing statements or "excessive" calling. But in most states they can technically call you daily if they determine within reason, that it's necessary.

Being in Ohio, I've collected on some things from PA and to the best of my knowledge this would all be the case for the original poster unless the laws have changed.

[Credithis]

Actually, the Texas Finance Code (TFC) is far more potent than the FDCPA. If the OP were to invoke it properly he can kick ass on a OC or JDB.

Here is a link on another forum (rather long posting) that covers Texas and it applies as the CA/OC is dunning from Texas:

[url=http://creditboards.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=240327&hl=TFC*%20392&st=75]Texas law seems to require CA to Delete if They fail to Respond to DV - CreditBoards[/url]

[debtcollector`]

Originally Posted by Credithis

Actually, the Texas Finance Code (TFC) is far more potent than the FDCPA. If the OP were to invoke it properly he can kick ass on a OC or JDB.

Here is a link on another forum (rather long posting) that covers Texas and it applies as the CA/OC is dunning from Texas:

This is a pretty crappy source you cited. Just slightly less credible than asking Jimbo, the wino living under the bridge, for asset protection strategies.


DC

[Credithis]

Well, I'm on dialup right now with limited access to the internet. That was the 1st link to it I found. If you read it carefully, Centex, who is an Attorney in Texas makes the point well, the other responses are simply others trying to get a grasp of the Texas law.

here: [url=http://www.oag.state.tx.us/consumer/debt_collection.shtml]Texas Attorney General[/url]

[url=http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/FI/content/htm/fi.005.00.000392.00.htm]FINANCE CODE** CHAPTER 392. DEBT COLLECTION[/url]


That source should be good enough for you. See, don't use the FDCPA as the Texas TFC provides more protections such as, the CA or OC must at anytime provide debt validation within 30 days even if the DV is outside the 30 day FDCPA mandate. Also, the OP must get a response within 30 days or be subject to sanctions if the TFC is invoked in the DV.

I can link several more forums explaining this but, they all say the same thing.

[JETX]

Originally Posted by Credithis

If you read it carefully, Centex, who is an Attorney in Texas makes the point well, the other responses are simply others trying to get a grasp of the Texas law.

HUH???
Your two 'links' are to the Texas Attorney General homepage (no 'Centex' there!!) and to a link to Texas Statutes (no 'Centex' there either).... and that link doesn't even work!!
Do you have ANY idea what you are trying to talk about??

I can link several more forums explaining this but, they all say the same thing.

Quote all you want (see above), but your information is NOT RELEVANT!!!

Texas laws have absolutely NOTHING to do with a debtor who lives in PA (even if the debt collector is in Texas). The issue here is in Pennsylvania. The applicable laws are there... NOT Texas.

[Credithis]

I was referring to the poster Centex in the Creditboards forum, my 1st posting.

[url=http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/FI/content/htm/fi.005.00.000392.00.htm]FINANCE CODE** CHAPTER 392. DEBT COLLECTION[/url] This works. And yes, since the debt collector resides in and is dunning from Texas they fall under all the demands imposed by the Texas TFC. the 1st post I made is very, very long but, has some useful info on how to properly apply this. Its up to the OP to follow it and make his own decisions. I'm simply pointing out that sometimes the States own debt laws are better and have more "teeth" than using the FDCPA.

I'm simply pointing to other avenues he can take.

[Zigner]

Originally Posted by Credithis

And yes, since the debt collector resides in and is dunning from Texas they fall under all the demands imposed by the Texas TFC.

I suggest that you back up this statement with something...

[Credithis]

]FINANCE CODE CHAPTER 392. DEBT COLLECTION[/url]

I see the link problem, when I posted just now for some reason this gets put at the end, delete this and it works.