-
FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.
Time Limits
- Thread starter zamigail
- Start date
Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills Please click a topic or scroll down for more.
I am not sure you are using the terminology right -- so I am not sure exactly what you sent. Here is a basic primer:
A dispute or a request for validation stops collection activity, if and only if, the collector receives your dispute within 30 days of the date of the initial communication with the consumer.
The initial communication can be a collection notice, a telephone call initiated by the collector, a telephone call initiated by the consumer, or a "blind DV" initiated by the consumer when the consumer has had no prior contact with the collector (for example, the consumer noticed an entry on a credit report).
Under the FDCPA, reporting to a credit reporting agency is a communication, however that area is still a little fuzzy. There is no case law that says reporting to the credit reporting agencies violates 1692c(c).
If your dispute/request for validation was not sent in time, the collector does not have to cease collection activity under any circumstances. A consumer has the right to request valiation at any time -- even months or years after the initial communication.
A Collection Agency is not required to validate. They are only required to cease collection activity until they validate (again, only under the limited condition described above).
There is not much clarity as to what constitutes validation. In its simpliest sense validation is nothing more than "yes, you owe the debt and the amount is $xxx and the original creditor was XYZ". Some on debt message boards maintain that the creditor is required to prove the debt (as in copies of original agreements, every statement since Adam and Eve, etc.). There is no such provision in the FDCPA. The creditor can only be required to provide such proof during the discovery stage of a lawsuit -- and then only as ordered by the judge.
The so-called Cease & Desist can be easiest understood as “put up or shut up” since the only choices left to the creditor/collection agency is to cease all contact or to initiate legal action. Once done, the collector can contact the consumer only once to state their intentions, which would be that the collector is ceasing collection activity, the collector intends to sue, or the collector intends to seek other remedies.
The FDCPA does not provide for a limited C&D as is advocated by many on debt message boards. A limited C&D is an instruction to the collector to never call but to handle all communication in writing. There are many opinions as to the effectiveness of such an instruction to a collection agency. Collection agencies react to the "limited" C&D in different ways -- some will ignore it and some will consider it a "full" C&D which just pushes them to a lawsuit. I've never seen a collection agency that communicates with consumers only in writing -- they are not set up for that and it is too expensive.
In any event, only third party collection agencies are subject to the FDCPA. Original creditors are not subject to the FDCPA. However, some states have their own state version of collection laws to which Original Creditors are subject.
A dispute or a request for validation stops collection activity, if and only if, the collector receives your dispute within 30 days of the date of the initial communication with the consumer.
The initial communication can be a collection notice, a telephone call initiated by the collector, a telephone call initiated by the consumer, or a "blind DV" initiated by the consumer when the consumer has had no prior contact with the collector (for example, the consumer noticed an entry on a credit report).
Under the FDCPA, reporting to a credit reporting agency is a communication, however that area is still a little fuzzy. There is no case law that says reporting to the credit reporting agencies violates 1692c(c).
If your dispute/request for validation was not sent in time, the collector does not have to cease collection activity under any circumstances. A consumer has the right to request valiation at any time -- even months or years after the initial communication.
A Collection Agency is not required to validate. They are only required to cease collection activity until they validate (again, only under the limited condition described above).
There is not much clarity as to what constitutes validation. In its simpliest sense validation is nothing more than "yes, you owe the debt and the amount is $xxx and the original creditor was XYZ". Some on debt message boards maintain that the creditor is required to prove the debt (as in copies of original agreements, every statement since Adam and Eve, etc.). There is no such provision in the FDCPA. The creditor can only be required to provide such proof during the discovery stage of a lawsuit -- and then only as ordered by the judge.
The so-called Cease & Desist can be easiest understood as “put up or shut up” since the only choices left to the creditor/collection agency is to cease all contact or to initiate legal action. Once done, the collector can contact the consumer only once to state their intentions, which would be that the collector is ceasing collection activity, the collector intends to sue, or the collector intends to seek other remedies.
The FDCPA does not provide for a limited C&D as is advocated by many on debt message boards. A limited C&D is an instruction to the collector to never call but to handle all communication in writing. There are many opinions as to the effectiveness of such an instruction to a collection agency. Collection agencies react to the "limited" C&D in different ways -- some will ignore it and some will consider it a "full" C&D which just pushes them to a lawsuit. I've never seen a collection agency that communicates with consumers only in writing -- they are not set up for that and it is too expensive.
In any event, only third party collection agencies are subject to the FDCPA. Original creditors are not subject to the FDCPA. However, some states have their own state version of collection laws to which Original Creditors are subject.
Time Frames
Florida - Thank you for your response. The letter sent to the credit agency was within the 30 day limit. It stated that the debt is time barred, that we are disputing the debt and requested the CA to cease and desist in their efforts to collect. Does the CA have a time frame in which they have to advise us of their intention to pursue the case through the courts? Sorry I was not clear on that.
Also, hubby has now received notices from a second collection agency relative to two other debts. The debt referred to above is on a report from only one of the 3 credit bureaus. These last two debts do not appear on any credit reports. We intend to send the same letter to this second CA.
All these debts were from a time before I knew him and prior to our marriage. I knew nothing about these debts which were apparently incurred in 1995/6.
I am concerned that should one of these CA's win a judgement against him, my assets may be in jeopardy.
Florida - Thank you for your response. The letter sent to the credit agency was within the 30 day limit. It stated that the debt is time barred, that we are disputing the debt and requested the CA to cease and desist in their efforts to collect. Does the CA have a time frame in which they have to advise us of their intention to pursue the case through the courts? Sorry I was not clear on that.
Also, hubby has now received notices from a second collection agency relative to two other debts. The debt referred to above is on a report from only one of the 3 credit bureaus. These last two debts do not appear on any credit reports. We intend to send the same letter to this second CA.
All these debts were from a time before I knew him and prior to our marriage. I knew nothing about these debts which were apparently incurred in 1995/6.
I am concerned that should one of these CA's win a judgement against him, my assets may be in jeopardy.
Q. The letter sent to the credit agency was within the 30 day limit. It stated that the debt is time barred, that we are disputing the debt and requested the CA to cease and desist in their efforts to collect. Does the CA have a time frame in which they have to advise us of their intention to pursue the case through the courts? Sorry I was not clear on that.
A. No. You may never hear anything again. Or, you might get sued tomorrow.
Q. Also, hubby has now received notices from a second collection agency relative to two other debts. The debt referred to above is on a report from only one of the 3 credit bureaus. These last two debts do not appear on any credit reports. We intend to send the same letter to this second CA.
A. OK. If the debts are out of statute, then fine. If they are still in statute, a cease & desist is dangerous (re-read my original response).
Q. All these debts were from a time before I knew him and prior to our marriage. I knew nothing about these debts which were apparently incurred in 1995/6.
A. The date incurred is not relevant. The key date is the date of first default (re-read my original response).
Q. I am concerned that should one of these CA's win a judgement against him, my assets may be in jeopardy.
A. FL is not a community property state. So, your assets are not at risk for his debts. But, it can get messy. For example, a judgment creditor can garnish any bank account that has his name on it. If you had your money in a bank account and put his name on it for convenience, well ... say goodbye to your money. In a similar fashion, if you own a home jointly, his ownership in the home can be attached -- which just gets all messy when it comes time to sell the home.
If your husband owes money and the debt is still within statute, he would be wise to deal with it before being sued and a judgment. You can pay it or you can negotiate a deal. Judgments last a very long time and they are a real pain. It is almost always cheaper to deal with the problem before it becomes a judgment.
A. No. You may never hear anything again. Or, you might get sued tomorrow.
Q. Also, hubby has now received notices from a second collection agency relative to two other debts. The debt referred to above is on a report from only one of the 3 credit bureaus. These last two debts do not appear on any credit reports. We intend to send the same letter to this second CA.
A. OK. If the debts are out of statute, then fine. If they are still in statute, a cease & desist is dangerous (re-read my original response).
Q. All these debts were from a time before I knew him and prior to our marriage. I knew nothing about these debts which were apparently incurred in 1995/6.
A. The date incurred is not relevant. The key date is the date of first default (re-read my original response).
Q. I am concerned that should one of these CA's win a judgement against him, my assets may be in jeopardy.
A. FL is not a community property state. So, your assets are not at risk for his debts. But, it can get messy. For example, a judgment creditor can garnish any bank account that has his name on it. If you had your money in a bank account and put his name on it for convenience, well ... say goodbye to your money. In a similar fashion, if you own a home jointly, his ownership in the home can be attached -- which just gets all messy when it comes time to sell the home.
If your husband owes money and the debt is still within statute, he would be wise to deal with it before being sued and a judgment. You can pay it or you can negotiate a deal. Judgments last a very long time and they are a real pain. It is almost always cheaper to deal with the problem before it becomes a judgment.
Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!
Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">