Collection Agency Must Break Down P&I
I DV’d this CA or JDB, whichever they are. They replied with a letter the same day they signed for my DV (03-21-07). Their letter states enclosed is the “verification” of debt that I requested. I intentionally put in my letter I am not asking for verification, but VALIDATION pursuant to FDCPA. I also requested anything that I had signed from the OC, an itemized bill from OC that states the amount owed is what you are asking for, an itemized bill from CA/JDB justifying the amount they are asking for, and proof that they actually own the debt. None of which I received. However, the “verification” letter they sent is just that, a letter, not a statement from the OC, but they make it appear like it is a statement and they put the OC’s name and address at the top to make it appear it is from OC, but you can tell it’s a word doc. I have statements and bills from OC and this looks nothing like them. There is also no accounting or itemization, just total due. Is there misrepresentation going on here? Should I send another letter demanding validation and point out that them misrepresenting this letter being from OC is a violation and could be grounds for me to get an attorney. You can tell the letter is freshly printed, not a fax or a copy, because how else could they get this letter from OC the same day they received my DV letter and send their reply the same day?!
Thanx, Chris
———————-
Hello Chris,
The FTC makes no distinction between the use of the word validation and verification. Keep in mind, there is a difference between validation and discovery.
In my opinion, you have an FDCPA violation if the balance has not been broken down as to principal, interest, etc. in such a way that the “least sophisticated” consumer can understand.
Also, there is nothing wrong with requesting the additional items that you have listed (proof that they own the debt, signed docs, etc.), although the FDCPA does not require the debt collector to provide all of those items through debt validation. You may want to print the FTC Wollman letter and include that in your response.
It does seem to me that you had an account with this creditor (you stated you have statements from them already), so I suppose you are only attempting to have a detailing/itemization of the balance.
Hope this helps.
Paul
This author is not an attorney and this information should not be considered legal advice. Please consult an attorney for legal advice.
This entire site is free.
March 26th, 2007 at 7:44 am
In response to my previous post. This is not the account that doesn’t belong to me or the account that went from $32.80 to $278. This account went from $85 to $191. I did include the Wollman letter with my DV letter. I thought the CA/JDB had to get verification/validation from the OC and forward that to the consumer, and that a mere printout from their own computer and information that they already have in their own system does not qualify as validation. I would think that the CA/JDB making it appear to be from OC would be clear misrepresentation and therefore illegal. Thanks again, Chris
March 26th, 2007 at 8:13 am
Yes, I agree, although current case law sets a relatively low standard for meeting the validation requirement. Reread the articles that have been hyperlinked above and you will see some ambiguity. In my opinion, the validation process should be used as a means of defense against a consumer who is dunned for a debt that is not owed or for an amount that is incorrect. There will be some who venture on the BCB (you know who you are) to exploit the validation process in a way that ultimately leads to rulings that are anti-consumer.
Bottom line is if the collection agency doesn’t break down the amount (separate Principal, Interest, etc.) then stick to your guns and let them know that the letter they typed up on Microsoft Word isn’t fooling anyone.
March 26th, 2007 at 10:03 am
What about 807(10)and/or (14)? I know I’m being a pain, I apologize, but, I feel strongly about this. I feel that I should include these in a follow up letter pointing out that they foolishly gave me ammo against them and to now leave me alone and delete their tradelines. My online dispute with OneBureau resulted in this account being deleted from OneBureau, but still remains on OtherBureaus. How long do they have to report disputed to the CRA’s? Again I apologize, Chris
March 26th, 2007 at 12:37 pm
Hey Chris, no bother. 10 & 14, why not?
The item has to be reported as disputed until the debt is validated.