Midland - is their response legal?

[SRQ]

We sent a dispute to MCM for a time barred acct on DH's CR. Our dispute letter cited state law about time barred debt, told them to stop contacting us and to delete from CR.

 

They responded with a bunch of old cc statements and a letter requesting payment. They also indicated they would no longer contact us as we requested unless it was to further respond to our dispute.

 

Nowhere in the letter did they indicate the debt was time barred and that they would not sue.

 

Is this a violation of the FDCPA? We live in FL.

 

Thanks.

[moosetracks]

They dont have to say its past SOL as far as I know. I would not have disputed time barred debt that cant even be reported just send a FOAD next time.

[SRQ]

It can be reported because it's within the 7 year reporting time frame.

[Guest]

It can be reported because it's within the 7 year reporting time frame.

Then why would they delete it? Midland is scum.

 

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk

[SRQ]

The question is: Is it required by law that they put in their letter they won't sue due to the debt being time barred?

[ICANHASMUNY?]

The question is: Is it required by law that they put in their letter they won't sue due to the debt being time barred?

 

It's not " statutory law" on this yet but there is Case law regarding demanding payment on an SOL debt as false and misleading

 

Florida 4 year SOL, unless there is a choice of law provision that has a state listed with a shorter SOL.

 

http://creditboards.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=392816

[SRQ]

O thank you ICANHASMUNY. I knew I read it somewhere. I will spare you my rant on how much I hate them.

 

Anyway, the debt is beyond SOL and their response to our dispute requests immediate payment. It does not have the language they won't sue because of the age of the debt that flowers** ACCEPHOLE finds important to include now.

 

Any ideas for how I can get it off?

 

Here are a few of mine:

Wrong amount - charging interest - but I don't know how they came up with the charges

Did not put disputed on credit report

Obsolete

 

This is was what we put in a letter to CRA - but I'm thinking ahead if these don't work....

 

thanks so much

[CG in TX]

The reason Asset puts that disclosure in their letters is a result of the FTC consent decree that they signed a couple years ago. Midland is not yet required to do that, although recent actions by several states would seem to indicate the time is rapidly approaching that all CAs and JDBs will be required to include that type pf disclaimer.

 

From what I have read about Midland, there isn't much that will get them to remove a T/L except passage of the reporting SOL.