Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Innocent_Kiss

CA "verified" via email?

Recommended Posts

Is this a thing now? TrueAccord sent an email with a "Your Request for Verification" as the subject.

 

We've finished processing your request, and we have confirmed that you owe a balance of $XX with PNC Bank.

You can print your debt validation document here. We will now continue to collect on this verified debt balance.

If you have additional questions, please contact us at (866) 611-2731 or reply to this email.

Best,
TrueAccord

Should I download it? Does this count as validation? I've never received validation via email. How do they know I read it? There's no return receipt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am guessing the 'print validation document here' had HERE as a link. And since it is a bank, am guessing it is a statement copy or an image of a returned item.

 

Without knowing what else there was and whether it was a link OR how you wrote your request, it might pass muster in litigation or it might not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That case is a little off point. She requested verification, which is not subject to the 5 day rule discussed in Lavallee. There is no time frame for verification, since it is assumed the information will have to come from a third party the DC has no control over. The only restriction is that they have to stop collection efforts until they provide verification., which they appear to have done.

 

It looks like they complied with the FDCPA. They can prove the email was sent and received. Almost everything is done by email now, and courts generally accept it as a valid means.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope, this came directly to my inbox. The print validation document here is a link. I sent a validation request via postal mail.

My question was not looking at the form in which you sent your original communication but rather what specifically was in the content. Generic crap begets generic crap.

 

The case linked in this thread speaks to an original notification, not the reply. As such, it would take some serious bootstrapping to get where you needed with that case. But without even knowing WHAT they have provided, there may not even BE a case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this the beginning of a trend? CAs responding to DV letters via what they believe is an e-mail?

 

My question would be, how they got the e-mail address, and how they verified that.

 

If there is some kind of precedent that a reply to something sent (either by regular or USPS CM-RRR) can be in electronic form, then what is next.. text messages? :dntknw: - and how would they verify those numbers?

 

These could be dangerous new waters. If a C&D demand was made, then the e-mail should be out of bounds......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this the beginning of a trend? CAs responding to DV letters via what they believe is an e-mail?

 

My question would be, how they got the e-mail address, and how they verified that.

 

If there is some kind of precedent that a reply to something sent (either by regular or USPS CM-RRR) can be in electronic form, then what is next.. text messages? :dntknw: - and how would they verify those numbers?

 

These could be dangerous new waters. If a C&D demand was made, then the e-mail should be out of bounds......

Without knowing what OP does for THEIR letterhead, it is entirely possible that it was either included in the materials from the original creditor OR it is in the letterhead used by the individual. If you got email from the OC, then you HAVE to presume the information was forwarded to the third-party with whom the matter was placed or sold.

 

Personally, i have no issue with a move to email given the ability to include delivery and read receipts with the outgoing email. Admittedly, I tend to be more inclined to fax with a hard copy being sent by regular mail run through my meter in those rare instances I do a letter for someone. But there is nothing that makes this 'dangerous new waters.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The risks of using email are minimal, but they do exist. They run the risk of third party disclosure. When the FDCPA was passed in the 70s, there was no such thing as email. They haven't updated the statute, so it's a gray area.

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  

  • Today's Birthdays

  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      177,132
    • Most Online
      1,528

    Newest Member
    Zo1919
    Joined

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