Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
walterg55

Texas law seems to require CA to Delete if They fail to Respond to DV

Recommended Posts


update: The pre-recorded messages from Rausch, Sturm, Israel & Hornik (the new collection effort) is actually from a different past due account, my own account through Target National Bank (the Overcash one was in my husband's name). I pulled my credit report and don't see this firm as the owner of the debt; also, there is no notation under Target that they have sold the account, but it does say it was charged off. Should I first contact Target to see if they are still owners of the account? Problem is, I probably cannot pay an amount per month that will make them happy, but I guess a good-faith effort is better than nothing. Or, should I call the number left by RSIH and ask for verification? I made mistakes by running from debt vs. trying to tackle it when we both lost our jobs within a few months -- some creditors worked with me and I am still 'in good standing' with them today; 3 others were less cooperative and decided to tack on fees and high interest, making a bad situation worse, so they were bumped down my priority list. One of those three is settled; one is Overcash, and the third is likely this RSIH collection attempt. If the OC can work with my limited income right now, I'd rather pay them than a JDB/CA. If the CA owns it now (but there's no indication on my credit report that they do), I'd just as soon make them jump through the verification hoops and at the very least buy myself some time.

 

TxGal1964 I tried to PM you with info but you are too new. Please start your own thread or send me a PM with an email address and I will try to assist.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is lots of excellent information in this thread regarding the Texas process, but also lots of rambling and confusing discussions. Having read all I can find about it, the best summaries that I am aware of describing the process can be found here:

 

Post # 14 Ready to DV per TFC 392...

http://creditboards.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=361667&view=findpost&p=3362646

 

Post # 67 Ready to DV per TFC 392.. (Texas Two Step) ...

http://creditboards.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=254636&view=findpost&p=2647401

 

Taking the Offensive in Texas ....

http://creditboards....8;#entry2348572

 

I hope this is helpful to Y'all.

Edited by MadAsHell2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I concur...

 

There is lots of excellent information in this thread regarding the Texas process, but also lots of rambling and confusing discussions. Having read all I can find about it, the best summaries that I am aware of describing the process can be found here:

 

Post # 14 Ready to DV per TFC 392...

http://creditboards.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=361667&view=findpost&p=3362646

 

Post # 67 Ready to DV per TFC 392.. (Texas Two Step) ...

http://creditboards.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=254636&view=findpost&p=2647401

 

Taking the Offensive in Texas ....

http://creditboards....8;#entry2348572

 

I hope this is helpful to Y'all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

update: The pre-recorded messages from Rausch, Sturm, Israel & Hornik (the new collection effort) is actually from a different past due account, my own account through Target National Bank (the Overcash one was in my husband's name). I pulled my credit report and don't see this firm as the owner of the debt; also, there is no notation under Target that they have sold the account, but it does say it was charged off. Should I first contact Target to see if they are still owners of the account? Problem is, I probably cannot pay an amount per month that will make them happy, but I guess a good-faith effort is better than nothing. Or, should I call the number left by RSIH and ask for verification? I made mistakes by running from debt vs. trying to tackle it when we both lost our jobs within a few months -- some creditors worked with me and I am still 'in good standing' with them today; 3 others were less cooperative and decided to tack on fees and high interest, making a bad situation worse, so they were bumped down my priority list. One of those three is settled; one is Overcash, and the third is likely this RSIH collection attempt. If the OC can work with my limited income right now, I'd rather pay them than a JDB/CA. If the CA owns it now (but there's no indication on my credit report that they do), I'd just as soon make them jump through the verification hoops and at the very least buy myself some time.

 

TxGal1964 I tried to PM you with info but you are too new. Please start your own thread or send me a PM with an email address and I will try to assist.

 

 

 

 

I'm still too new to see member profiles in order to PM you, LOL. I'll try to start a separate thread tomorow, when I'm not so tired. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is lots of excellent information in this thread regarding the Texas process, but also lots of rambling and confusing discussions. Having read all I can find about it, the best summaries that I am aware of describing the process can be found here:

 

Post # 14 Ready to DV per TFC 392...

http://creditboards.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=361667&view=findpost&p=3362646

 

Post # 67 Ready to DV per TFC 392.. (Texas Two Step) ...

http://creditboards.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=254636&view=findpost&p=2647401

 

Taking the Offensive in Texas ....

http://creditboards....8;#entry2348572

 

I hope this is helpful to Y'all.

 

It appears I had an error on the Texas Two Step link above. Here is the correct link. http://creditboards.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=361667&view=findpost&p=3745257

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember when I first read this thread. Best one on this site. Helped me get a house, a boat, a truck, and almost 200 FICO points. Several CA's folded instantly every time.

Edited by Jon77

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a question regarding Texas DV. I sent a letter to AFNI using the Texas DV. I got a letter back from them stating this:

 

Dear Valued Customer:

 

This is a verification to your recent inquiry......

 

Creditor: Sprint

Orig Creditor: Sprint

Addreess: XXXXXXXXX

Creditor Acct# xxxxxxx

Orig Balance: $xxx.xx

Fee: $0

Balance: xxx.xx

 

This letter was sent.....

This is an attempt to collect a debt......

 

I am curious as to what to do now? Should I send them another letter stating that they didnt give proper validation and gave verification instead. Or should I move on to using the FCRA?

 

Any help would be great. Centex?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

update:

 

so i pulled my report today and it appears that AFNI was removed from EX. Its still showing on the other 2 reports. Funny thing is that when I look at my alerts, it shows that AFNI updated info with EX first. What gives?

Edited by schizcat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a question regarding Texas DV. I sent a letter to AFNI using the Texas DV. I got a letter back from them stating this:

 

Dear Valued Customer:

 

This is a verification to your recent inquiry......

 

Creditor: Sprint

Orig Creditor: Sprint

Addreess: XXXXXXXXX

Creditor Acct# xxxxxxx

Orig Balance: $xxx.xx

Fee: $0

Balance: xxx.xx

 

This letter was sent.....

This is an attempt to collect a debt......

 

I am curious as to what to do now? Should I send them another letter stating that they didnt give proper validation and gave verification instead. Or should I move on to using the FCRA?

 

Any help would be great. Centex?

 

 

According to this thread that does not constitute proper validation or verification. http://creditboards.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=425508&st=0&p=4046777entry4046777

 

Take a look at this thread to understand the next step. http://creditboards.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=361667&st=50&p=3745257entry3745257

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

update:

 

so i pulled my report today and it appears that AFNI was removed from EX. Its still showing on the other 2 reports. Funny thing is that when I look at my alerts, it shows that AFNI updated info with EX first. What gives?

 

 

EX always reports things first, then (for me) it's EQ the following day, then TU a few days later.

 

If AFNI has started deleting, just let it play out to see if they will remove from all 3.

 

Technically, what they sent you does fulfill the TFC, although it may or may not be proper validation in a judge's eyes. Whether or not you decide to pursue it depends on a number of factors, the main one being legal SOL. However, if they are deleting, I would leave it alone for now. I had a few do this exact same thing when I TFC DV'd them.

Edited by wow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

update:

 

so i pulled my report today and it appears that AFNI was removed from EX. Its still showing on the other 2 reports. Funny thing is that when I look at my alerts, it shows that AFNI updated info with EX first. What gives?

 

 

EX always reports things first, then (for me) it's EQ the following day, then TU a few days later.

 

If AFNI has started deleting, just let it play out to see if they will remove from all 3.

 

Technically, what they sent you does fulfill the TFC, although it may or may not be proper validation in a judge's eyes. Whether or not you decide to pursue it depends on a number of factors, the main one being legal SOL. However, if they are deleting, I would leave it alone for now. I had a few do this exact same thing when I TFC DV'd them.

 

ironically, I pulled my report today and it was off of EQ. looks pretty sweet. I will wait a few days and see what TU does. I am just wanting to get it off but also try to get a letter or something saying they pulled it off so if I have any issues in the future, I can throw that back at them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chronology:

  1. Have Chase credit card, account originally with WAMU opened in 2007. Good standing until laid off from job in 2008.
    Couldn't continue to make payments.
  2. Account was sold to Midland Funding in march 2010.
  3. Recevied letter from Midland Funding sometime in April.
  4. Sent letter to Midland AND UW requesting DV citing TFC ONLY.
    Demanded:
    "Pursuant to Texas Finance Code § 392.202(B), if after no more than 30 days the investigation is unable to
    conclusively prove the accuracy of this alleged debt, then Midland Funding LLC is obligated under Texas Finance Code
    § 392.202(a) to cease all collection activities and communications which include, but are in no way limited to,
    reporting information that may be viewed as derogatory to any credit reporting agency or any other entity.
     
    In accordance with Texas Finance Code § 392.202(d)(1), if the investigation is not completed within the span of 30
    consecutive days beginning with the receipt of this letter, my request is that any and all information being reported
    in relation to this debt be immediately removed from any credit reporting agency, or any other data collection
    service, used by Midland Funding LLC which includes, but is in no way limited to, Transunion, Experian, Equifax.
    In addition, I am requesting that the debt be removed from your books and never be sold to any other entity."
     
  5. Nothing received at all.
  6. Received letter from Rausch, Sturm, Israel, Enerson & Hornick in December noting that they have been retained by
    Midland Funding to collect this debt.
  7. Sent letter to RSIEH stating that I received nothing from Midland and that they cannot collect on this debt due to the
    demands I laid out for non-compliance. Also added this statement
    "Also, pursuant to The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act § 805(a)(1), I hereby inform you that telephone communications
    are inconvenient. Please do not contact me via telephone for any reason regarding this alleged debt. Written communications
    delivered via the United States Postal Service, or other professional delivery service, are acceptable."
  8. This is also at the bottom of every letter I send:
    "This notice is not an admission of liability, a promise or renewed promise to pay, or a refusal to
    pay. This notice should not be construed as authorization or permission to request my credit
    history or add any inquiry to my credit report; however, it is an authorization to repair the noted
    trade lines in my credit histories. This is an attempt to avoid further expense, inconvenience and
    delay, and to dispose of extremely expensive, burdensome, and protracted litigation.
    Any communication regarding this or any other matter should be conducted solely by mail to the
    address shown above."
  9. Have been getting automated calls from RSIEH daily.
  10. Just received a package from RSIEH. It contains:

    1. Copy of sale of account from Chase to Midland Funding, dated
      March 10,2010.
    2. Copy of every monthly statement from 10/23/2008

 

Letter cites Chaudrhy and the above constitutes valid validation.

 

I have NOT checked to see if this is on any of my reports. How do I respond here?

Edited by MB34

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@MB34

 

See this thread http://creditboards.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=254636&st=0

 

I see an additional possible violation, that Midland Funding does not appear to be bonded with the Texas Secretary of State for debt collection activities as required by state law. They do have a bond as Midland Credit Management, but the laws require they be bonded under the same name they use for collection activities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll ask my other question here as well:

 

SubChapter D: Prohibited Debt Collection Methods

 

392.301 - Threats or Coercion

392.302 - Harassement; Abuse

392.303 - Unfair or Unconscionable Means

392.304 - Fraudulent, Deceptive, or Misleading Representations

392.305 - Deceptive Use of Credit Bureau Name

392.306 - Use of Independent Debt Collector

 

 

I determined to be a TFC expert when this is all said and done. I cannot determine, for the life of me, where to tie in dunning and reporting violations.

 

Can someone already fully versed in the TFC, direct me to the section of SubChpt D that specifies requirements of mailing a dunning letter within 5 days or reporting as an open account?Or am I totally confusing the TFC with the FDCPA???

 

Where are the reporting violations outlined?

 

TIA

Edited by Texastarz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I know there is NO requirement for the 5 day letter under the TFC392. However the CA MUST respond to your DV under TX law. Midland blew you off correct?

 

Did the "validation" from the new law firm come in the 30 days? Are they bonded to collect in Texas?

 

 

 

I'll ask my other question here as well:

 

SubChapter D: Prohibited Debt Collection Methods

 

392.301 - Threats or Coercion

392.302 - Harassement; Abuse

392.303 - Unfair or Unconscionable Means

392.304 - Fraudulent, Deceptive, or Misleading Representations

392.305 - Deceptive Use of Credit Bureau Name

392.306 - Use of Independent Debt Collector

 

 

I determined to be a TFC expert when this is all said and done. I cannot determine, for the life of me, where to tie in dunning and reporting violations.

 

Can someone already fully versed in the TFC, direct me to the section of SubChpt D that specifies requirements of mailing a dunning letter within 5 days or reporting as an open account?Or am I totally confusing the TFC with the FDCPA???

 

Where are the reporting violations outlined?

 

TIA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I know there is NO requirement for the 5 day letter under the TFC392. However the CA MUST respond to your DV under TX law. Midland blew you off correct?

 

Did the "validation" from the new law firm come in the 30 days? Are they bonded to collect in Texas?

 

 

 

I'll ask my other question here as well:

 

SubChapter D: Prohibited Debt Collection Methods

 

392.301 - Threats or Coercion

392.302 - Harassement; Abuse

392.303 - Unfair or Unconscionable Means

392.304 - Fraudulent, Deceptive, or Misleading Representations

392.305 - Deceptive Use of Credit Bureau Name

392.306 - Use of Independent Debt Collector

 

 

I determined to be a TFC expert when this is all said and done. I cannot determine, for the life of me, where to tie in dunning and reporting violations.

 

Can someone already fully versed in the TFC, direct me to the section of SubChpt D that specifies requirements of mailing a dunning letter within 5 days or reporting as an open account?Or am I totally confusing the TFC with the FDCPA???

 

Where are the reporting violations outlined?

 

TIA

 

I have not been able to verify this but I previously came across a comment here http://creditboards.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=18154&view=findpost&p=1902053 indicating that attorney's may not need to be bonded. I thought I had read a more specific statement then that one I linked to somewhere, but have not been able to find it. I guess that would be a question for the Secretary of State's office to answer.

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mad...

 

Look at the definitions section of TFC392 -

 

(7)  "Third-party debt collector" means a debt collector, as defined by 15 U.S.C. Section 1692a(6), but does not include an attorney collecting a debt as an attorney on behalf of and in the name of a client unless the attorney has nonattorney employees who:

 

(A)  are regularly engaged to solicit debts for collection; or

 

(B)  regularly make contact with debtors for the purpose of collection or adjustment of debts.

 

Even if they are an Attorney and do either A OR B then they need to be bonded

 

As far as I know there is NO requirement for the 5 day letter under the TFC392. However the CA MUST respond to your DV under TX law. Midland blew you off correct?

 

Did the "validation" from the new law firm come in the 30 days? Are they bonded to collect in Texas?

 

 

 

I'll ask my other question here as well:

 

SubChapter D: Prohibited Debt Collection Methods

 

392.301 - Threats or Coercion

392.302 - Harassement; Abuse

392.303 - Unfair or Unconscionable Means

392.304 - Fraudulent, Deceptive, or Misleading Representations

392.305 - Deceptive Use of Credit Bureau Name

392.306 - Use of Independent Debt Collector

 

 

I determined to be a TFC expert when this is all said and done. I cannot determine, for the life of me, where to tie in dunning and reporting violations.

 

Can someone already fully versed in the TFC, direct me to the section of SubChpt D that specifies requirements of mailing a dunning letter within 5 days or reporting as an open account?Or am I totally confusing the TFC with the FDCPA???

 

Where are the reporting violations outlined?

 

TIA

 

I have not been able to verify this but I previously came across a comment here http://creditboards.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=18154&view=findpost&p=1902053 indicating that attorney's may not need to be bonded. I thought I had read a more specific statement then that one I linked to somewhere, but have not been able to find it. I guess that would be a question for the Secretary of State's office to answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This seems somewhat sketchy. I mean what if the debtor says they never received response within 30 days, when in fact they did? Or if a CA says the responded and in actuality the debtor never received a letter back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read the TFC392, BCC17 and BCC20 thoroughly. In Texas, by law, a consumer can DV at ANY time. Any letters you send regarding credit, send CMRRR. The green card with a signature and date is proof they received your letters.

 

This seems somewhat sketchy. I mean what if the debtor says they never received response within 30 days, when in fact they did? Or if a CA says the responded and in actuality the debtor never received a letter back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  




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