Jump to content

Bluesie58

Members
  • Content Count

    341
  • Joined

Recent Profile Visitors

378 profile views
  1. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-deaths-from-coronavirus-are-so-high-in-italy/
  2. From the cited article: ”Sandy Nurse doesn’t see why she needs to be $120,000 in debt “just for trying to improve my understanding of the world.” That attitude is self-explanatory.
  3. They’ve satisfied the notice requirement in 1692g(a), that’s all. Disputing is part of a validation request. If it chooses to continue collection efforts, upon receipt of a timely request, the debt collector must then satisfy 1692g(b).
  4. I respectfully disagree . Unless there are statistics that show that DV requests for accounts still within the SOL are more likely to encourage lawsuits, I would send a validation request. I was sued for accounts when I did NOT request validation. However, I was never sued for the accounts for which I did request validation. In regard to the OP, a lawsuit cannot be filed after receiving a timely request for validation and before sufficient validation had been provided.
  5. In my previous post, I noted that the PA statutes do not make a reference to credit card debt judgments and a 10-year SOL. The only 10 year SOL appears to be for “adverse possession”. I also saw nothing for 12 years. Therefore, I cited the 20-year SOL which was the SOL referenced in the post by @centex. I cited Shearer from the PA Supreme Court which explained the difference between a judgment lien and judgment execution. Here is another quote from Shearer. ”A judgment continues to exist, and can be executed on by having the sheriff sell personal property, whether or not a writ of revival is ever filed. Again, it is the lien against real property that is revived, not the judgment. ” I hope this helps to resolve the issue of revival of liens vs. the actual judgment.
  6. According to PA statutes, execution of a judgment has an SOL of 20 years. I didn’t see anything in the statutes about credit cards judgments and 10 years. § 5529. Twenty year limitation. (a) Execution against personal property.--An execution against personal property must be issued within 20 years after the entry of the judgment upon which the execution is to be issued. Here is how the PA Supreme Court explained a judgment lien vs. judgment execution. “Therefore, § 5529 prevents a judgment creditor from satisfying its judgment by executing against the personal property of the debtor more than twenty years after the judgment was entered. A judgment lien, however, merely "prevents a debtor from encumbering or conveying any real property he might own in such a way as to divest the effect of the judgment, [and] also prevent later lienholders from satisfying their debt without first paying the earlier lien." Shearer v. Naftzinger, 747 A.2d 859, 860-861 (Pa. 2000). The plain language of § 5529 concerns execution against the lien property only and expresses no time limitation on filing a writ of revival of the judgment lien. Id. The expiration of a judgment lien has no effect on the execution of a judgment.
  7. You’re assuming FCO purchased the account from the apartment complex. Not all debt collectors purchase debts. Some merely collect for the original creditor and the money goes to the original creditor. Was the request sent within 30 days of the initial collection letter? The initial collection letter would have included the 30-day notice of your son’s right to request validation. Unless your state law says differently (such as Texas), if your letter was not sent within 30 days of receiving their letter containing the 30-day notice, they didn’t have to validate. In the event your request was timely, did their documentation include anything showing the amount they are claiming is owed?
  8. They validated the debt. I assume you copied your validation request from some internet site? It requires documentation that debt collectors are not required to provide. It also makes claims that are incorrect. For instance: “I require compliance with the terms and conditions of this letterwithin 30 days or a complete withdrawal, in writing, of any claim.” Debt collectors do not have to respond within 30 days unless your state collection law makes such a requirement.
  9. They didn’t have to send validation within 30 days. Pretty much all that’s required for validation is to show that you are the correct consumer and that the amount claimed is what the original creditor claimed was owed.
  10. He may have reset the SOL for collection, but if the accounts were already charged off, it was not reset for credit reporting.
  11. NY has this law for credit reporting. New York State General Business Law Section 380-j “(f)(1) Except as authorized under paragraph two of this subdivision, no consumer reporting agency may make any consumer report containing any of the following items of information. (iv) accounts placed for collection or charged to profit and loss which antedate the report by more than seven years;  or accounts placed for collection or charged to profit and loss, which have been paid and which antedate the report by more than five years; “
  12. Unless NY has a different law regarding validation, the OP can send a validation letter, but the CA won’t be required to respond. But I know some CAs will respond under these circumstances, so hopefully that will happen for the OP.
  13. You say it’s a dispute letter, but it doesn’t dispute anything. Also, what “additional legal remedies”? Legal remedies for what?

About Us

Since 2003, creditboards.com has helped thousands of people repair their credit, force abusive collection agents to follow the law, ensure proper reporting by credit reporting agencies, and provided financial education to help avoid the pitfalls that can lead to negative tradelines.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines