Validation letter sent; have a ? on the response recieved

[Sappho]

What is the name of your state? NY

On December 13 I sent a letter Return receipt certified to Capital One and the third party credit collector asking for a complete debt validation including fees and account closing/ opening.

On Monday I recieved a letter dated January 17th from Capital One. It seems that once I challenged the validity of the debt all correspondence has shifted to Capital One and not from the third party creditor.

The newest letter I recieved from Capital One states that they are unable to process my request until I fill out the enclosed form and return. The enlosed form asks for all of my pertinent information; SS# address, Birthdate.

Question: Do I fill this out and send it back? It does not seem like a good idea.

ALSO, The original validation letter sent from Capial One in November states my last payment was 9/2000, and states I owe XXXX balance with no explanation as to interest.

I believe the SOL has expired, 6 years from date of last payment. (NY)

Question: If the SOL has expired do I send a letter affirming the debt and that under NY statute the SOL has expired?????


I really appreciate you help.

 

[tanja53]

If I where you I would write a complaint with proof to comptroller of currency and make a complaint.
And if you are allowed, dpense on your state,
file the same complaint at youyr states court.
I am going through things my self in CA. Good luck.

 

[Sappho]

what does this mean

If I where you I would write a complaint with proof to comptroller of currency and make a complaint.

What does this mean?

Thanks for your reply

 

[Debt Guy]

asking for a complete debt validation including fees and account closing/ opening.

Validation is nothing more than the name and address of the original creditor. They are not required to provide any other information.

On Monday I recieved a letter dated January 17th from Capital One. It seems that once I challenged the validity of the debt all correspondence has shifted to Capital One and not from the third party creditor.

So long as the 3rd party collector has ceased collection activity, there is no violation.

The newest letter I recieved from Capital One states that they are unable to process my request until I fill out the enclosed form and return. The enlosed form asks for all of my pertinent information; SS# address, Birthdate.

Question: Do I fill this out and send it back? It does not seem like a good idea.
\

Why do you think that?

ALSO, The original validation letter sent from Capial One in November states my last payment was 9/2000, and states I owe XXXX balance with no explanation as to interest.


Again, they are not required to address the interest question. But, hang onto that letter as if it were gold.

I believe the SOL has expired, 6 years from date of last payment. (NY)

That is correct provided you have continually been a resident of NY.

Question: If the SOL has expired do I send a letter affirming the debt and that under NY statute the SOL has expired?????

Your call, but I would just send a letter to the CA and the OC to cease and desist all contact. The instruction is binding on the CA but not the OC.

Caution -- just because the debt is OOS does not mean you cannot be sued. OOS is merely an affirmative defense to the lawsuit. If you are sued, you must answer the lawsuit. That is when that letter from the OC will be golden.


PS -- I don't know what Tanja is talking about either. You can complain to the comptroller but complain about what? I can't tell they have done anything wrong.

 

[Sappho]

thank you

Debt Guy:
Thank you for your response. I appreciate your advice, alot!

 

[OhioBasketCase]

asking for a complete debt validation including fees and account closing/ opening.

Validation is nothing more than the name and address of the original creditor. They are not required to provide any other information.

That statement is WRONG!

Here is what the law says about debt validation:

What does a debt collector need to provide as debt validation?

* Proof that the collection company owns the debt/or has been assigned the debt. This is basic contract law. It is very difficult to get a judgment without a direct contract between collection agency and the original creditor.
* At a minimum, some account statements from the original creditor. If you really want to get sticky, you can pin them down on the amount of the debt by requiring complete payment history, starting with the original creditor. This requirement was established by the case Fields v. Wilber Law Firm, Donald L. Wilber and Kenneth Wilber, USCA-02-C-0072, 7th Circuit Court, Sept 2004..
* Copy of the original signed loan agreement or credit card application. However, account statements from the original can fulfill these requirements.

That is way more then just address and name of the OC.

 

[tanja53]

CC is the where you can make a complaint if you think that you have been treated wrongly.
Yhey take care of complaints against banks, credit card companys.
You can find them on internet.
I have reported credit cards companys myself . And they are investigating.

 

[You Are Guilty]

That statement is WRONG!

Here is what the law says about debt validation:

What does a debt collector need to provide as debt validation?

* Proof that the collection company owns the debt/or has been assigned the debt. This is basic contract law. It is very difficult to get a judgment without a direct contract between collection agency and the original creditor.
* At a minimum, some account statements from the original creditor. If you really want to get sticky, you can pin them down on the amount of the debt by requiring complete payment history, starting with the original creditor. This requirement was established by the case Fields v. Wilber Law Firm, Donald L. Wilber and Kenneth Wilber, USCA-02-C-0072, 7th Circuit Court, Sept 2004..
* Copy of the original signed loan agreement or credit card application. However, account statements from the original can fulfill these requirements.

That is way more then just address and name of the OC.

Actually, had you actually read the statute and not some rambling website, you'd know that it can very be be "just" the name and address. All that nonsense you posted isn't required by Federal law or in any state I know of in this country.

If you insist on posting in the future, at least have the courtesy to attempt to be correct.

 

[TigerD]

That statement is WRONG!
Here is what the law says about debt validation:
What does a debt collector need to provide as debt validation?
* Proof that the collection company owns the debt/or has been assigned the debt. This is basic contract law. It is very difficult to get a judgment without a direct contract between collection agency and the original creditor.
* At a minimum, some account statements from the original creditor. If you really want to get sticky, you can pin them down on the amount of the debt by requiring complete payment history, starting with the original creditor. This requirement was established by the case Fields v. Wilber Law Firm, Donald L. Wilber and Kenneth Wilber, USCA-02-C-0072, 7th Circuit Court, Sept 2004..
* Copy of the original signed loan agreement or credit card application. However, account statements from the original can fulfill these requirements.
That is way more then just address and name of the OC.

Yet another moron pretending to know things that he doesn't understand. The law is quite clear and you are quite wrong.
FDCPA : 15 USC 1692g

§ 809. Validation of debts
(b) If the consumer notifies the debt collector in writing within the thirty-day period described in subsection (a) that the debt, or any portion thereof, is disputed, or that the consumer requests the name and address of the original creditor, the debt collector shall cease collection of the debt, or any disputed portion thereof, until the debt collector
obtains verification of the debt or any copy of a judgment, or the name and address of the original creditor, and a copy of such verification or judgment, or name and address of the original creditor, is mailed to the consumer by the debt collector. Collection activities and communications that do not otherwise violate this title may continue during the 30-day period referred to in subsection (a) unless the consumer has notified the debt collector in writing that the debt, or any portion of the debt, is disputed or that the consumer requests the name and address of the original creditor. Any collection activities and communication during the 30-day period may not overshadow or be inconsistent with the disclosure of the consumer’s right to dispute the debt or request the name and address of the original creditor.

 

[Liquid]

Yet another debt collector spewing off ridiculous information. In that part that says "the name of address of the original creditor", it's clearly referring to the part in the sentence above talking about someone who ONLY asked for the name and address of the creditor. DC is clearly avoiding the part that says "until the debt collector obtains verification of the debt." Anyone who thinks that the name and address of the OC is legit validation, I've got a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you...

Sapphro.... DO NOT fill out that form they sent you. YOU are the one requesting information from THEM...not the other way around. If they have enough info where they can report you to the credit bureaus, then they should at least have your SS number and your birthdate.

Also, come over to creditboards.com and read a little bit over there. There's no way you should be taking advice from debt collectors. These guys lie like a rug, and are completely misinformed. Take advice from the people that were in the exact same situation as you, and were able to beat it.

 

[dcatz]

Show me the law defining “legit validation” and I won’t ask to see the deed to the bridge.

Until you do that, I don’t see anything in the quoted portion of the statute that appears in all caps. By your reasoning, it must be somewhere or there is no basis for making your distinction. Some other part of the statute gives the consumer the right to ask for more, huh? What else can they learn? Creditor had acne at 13? Has a drinking problem or a bad marriage? Corporation has labor issues. Questions about timing of options? Woooo, bet this could get juicy. Must be a lot of sharing among the truly informed.

At least need the SSAN and birth date to report? That must be in that other thing – FCRA, FACR, ACRF? What was it again? If they report more than one, do they need to know more? Mole on the shoulder? Allergic to cats? And the FTC gave them that right? When will this ever end?

 

[Liquid]

There is no law defining validation. Section 803 of the FDCPA has all the definitions, and validation is not one of them. Do you have a law that shows exactly what validation is? And don't say that "name and address of the OC" crap either. You and I both know that is not validation. If it was THAT easy for a debt collector to provide validation, then why do they ALWAYS back down when they receive a couple DV letters? Seems like they could just provide the name and address of the OC, and then they could resume their collecting. Why don't they?

If all that's needed is the name and address of the OC, then what's stopping me from starting my own collection agency, send dunning letters to everyone in the phone book, and start collecting checks from anyone that's dumb enough to send them? Then when people send me a DV letter, I write back saying "Here's the name and address for American Express.....now pay me."

 

[Debt Guy]

For Sappho

Ignore Ohio and Liquid.

First, they are flat wrong. You can read the FDCPA for yourself and see they are wrong.

Second, they are so focused on being vituperative, they are paying no attention to your set of facts:

1. The debt is SOL.
2. You have been advised to send a cease and desist and forget the whole thing until and unless you are sued.​

Since they are not paying attention and since this is important to you, the definition of validation is meaningless to you. You could care less whether anyone ever responds to a DV or what they say. It just does not apply to you.

Finally, Liquid has directed you to the creditboards site. Go play there is you want. I am well familiar with the site and consider it to be dangerous to anyone who does not understand the FDCPA or FCRA. Much of the advice there is like what you are seeing here from Liquid and Ohio -- unsubstantiated internet myth and just flat bad info. I encourage you to be cautious.

If you want a second opinion from a more reputable site, try the collection forum at creditinfocenter.com. There is a lot of garbage there also but also some folks who will step in to correct the worst of the bad information.



For Ohio and Liquid

I challenge you to support your claims with facts. By facts I do not mean to cut and paste the entirety of the FDCPA and say "read this". My challenge is that you quote sentence by sentence exactly what part of the FDCPA supports your claim. You may, if you wish, also cite any court cases that support your position.

C'mon guys! You talk big. Now back it up.

I will bet dollars to dough nut holes you cannot meet this challenge.



For Liquid

You say you can show the OP how to beat this. Exactly what is it that needs to be beaten? Do you know? I will sell you a clue.

 

[Liquid]

Unsubstantiated internet myth?? Right now there are 147 people browsing the credit forum, vs 11 here. That board is so active that the threads drop off the first page in about 10 minutes. Must be a lot of BS being thrown around all over the place on creditboards!! Why don't you come join us too? Here, the same 3 or 4 debt collectors respond to every single thread with information that is not helping the consumer at all. All it's helping is the huge crew of debt collectors.

Listen, I'm not claiming to know every single law in the book. I do know enough, and I also know that I raised my Equifax score from 577 to 708 in the matter of 3 months. There are hundreds of other people on creditboards that have done the exact same thing. There are also plenty of people who have successfully fought off the debt collectors, and all it cost them was a few bucks to send a certified letter.

Anyone who would actually listen to a debt collector on how to do a DV ought to have their head examined...

 

[dcatz]

147 people going and coming every 10 minutes. Good, Liquid. But I don’t want to talk to the 15-20 success stories. I want to talk to the 100s that must be drinking the kool-aid and thinking that everyone is similarly situated. They aren’t.

The fact of the matter is that, if I were similarly situated, I’d want to hear from those who made mistakes. I’d want to learn from them. I don’t want to hear from the 2% of the debtor-consumer population that dealt with the 2-3% of the debt collection industry that deals with junk debt, unless I knew I and those that were trying to collect fell into that category. It’s not only an aberration that you make the norm, it’s equally castigated in this forum as in your stomping grounds. A small bit of reading would have told you that.

I’m tired of the rubric of “junk debt buyer” that you apply to all, and the only reason that I’m tired is that it leads you to give out misinformation as if it were written on stone tablets. I personally don’t speak for FA or even this forum, but I’ve looked at other sites, I’ve taught consumer law and I collect debt. I can separate the wheat from the chaff. If I were similarly situated and given a choice, I’d want information from those who use it daily and must understand it, rather than those whose fortuitous experience has led them to believe that it’s something that is universally applicable. If I’m dealing with the same CAs that you did, for the same types of debt and all other conditions are also the same, you’re important. Otherwise, no.

I don’t wish injury or inequity to anyone who seeks help at any source. That said, there are times when I think that you and those who proselytize like you, and damn anyone who would speak differently, are the greatest asset to the ARM profession since bulk mail and predictive dialers.

You’re absolutely right; there is no definition. So are you better for implying there is and you know the secret and all should follow you? That was exactly my point, and you proved it. DC posted the statute. You posted zip except that collectors lie like rugs. Was the post wrong, altered? Then who are you? “I know enough”. And that means what? I’ve made my point. You refute it.